|
The parallel scenes of the robot in the bombed out car freaking the gently caress out, and the guy brought back from the dead for 30 seconds culminate in the nervous R2-D2 suicide robots. There's an abject disgust there on the behalf of the creator, why do these things feel that deeply to begin with? Why are there AI afterlives and near death experiences? Isn't that perverse?
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 02:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 09:13 |
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Flying a ship up to a space station and blowing it up from inside is a form of podracing, as Anakin notes at the end of Phantom Menace. I haven't seen it yet, so I was being sincere. Sounds like THAT is podracing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 03:30
|
|
|
jeeves posted:
The only people that call it a weapon are US army people. One of the big reveals of the film is that it is not a weapon at all, it is a person, a a peacemaker, a Christ figure. The contrast with ex machina is interesting though. One movie man plays God by creating AI and is punished with extinction, and the other movie a woman births AI and humanity is saved.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 06:01
|
|
|
Simulation883 posted:Also a question: Wasn't it mentioned during the movie that Alfie would die if she shut off the NOMAD? It seemed pretty simple for her. Or was that just because they focused on the routing system inside the base as opposed the whole station from hundreds of miles away? the idea was that Alfie would eventually be able to turn Norad off from the ground. the implication was that sending her up to NOMAD would be a suicide mission, not that interfacing with NOMAD would kill her. eg. falling from orbit to earth, being blown up, falling into space, etc
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 06:12
|
|
|
it’s even an immaculate conception - this is not a subtle movie
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 07:27
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:The Creator - 2/5
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 07:37
|
|
|
Yeah this was a rough one, really dissapointed. Some cool scenes and ideas but incredibly disjointed and clunky. Awkward dialogue and some really rough acting took me out of it a lot of the time, on top of the messy story. Third act was genuinely bad. Visually impressive and I dig Edwards overall style and vibe but its really apparent why they had to reshoot much of Rogue One if this is anything to go by. Glad I went and saw it to judge for myself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 07:51
|
|
|
I'm reminded of Ad Astra, a similarly ambitious movie where the auteur director rattled off a list of influential movies while marketing the movie. Blade Runner? Akira? Wow what depths you have plumbed, I bet you're a big fan of cult director Stanley Kubrick too. I liked it, but as I've been reading over and over in this thread, it's a really clunky story. But what visuals! I'd love to know how they managed such a low budget. A new, more painful kind of crunch?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 08:21
|
|
|
SCheeseman posted:I'm reminded of Ad Astra, a similarly ambitious movie where the auteur director rattled off a list of influential movies while marketing the movie. Blade Runner? Akira? Wow what depths you have plumbed, I bet you're a big fan of cult director Stanley Kubrick too. Edwards has a lot of background in low budget VFX that look good for their cost, its sort of what he cut his teeth on. He made a name for himself very early in his career by doing all of the VFX for a BBC documentary he directed about Hannibal, entirely in his home studio using early After Effects and I believe Cinema 4D. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBeHljB6uFU He then shot, directed and did the VFX for his debut indie, Monsters. Super scrappy low budget production, skeleton crew just driving around South America shooting tons of improv scenes on one of the first cinema grade digital cameras. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z52OHXfLbSU He's very very good at knowing how to design, shoot for and produce good VFX for a fraction of the cost so when he gets a serious budget he knows how to work wonders with it. Huge strength of his but he definitely needs to work on his storytelling. AccountSupervisor fucked around with this message at 08:48 on Oct 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 08:36
|
|
|
SCheeseman posted:I'm reminded of Ad Astra, a similarly ambitious movie where the auteur director rattled off a list of influential movies while marketing the movie. Blade Runner? Akira? Wow what depths you have plumbed, I bet you're a big fan of cult director Stanley Kubrick too. I made that comparison on the way home as well, but I was more focused on how Ad Astra was filmed by 2 separate directors and smushed together to make one movie (at the studio's orders). One did the action set pieces, one did the personal intimate sci fi story. The Creator had a similar "two completely different movies fighting for space" problem, but this time it can be attributed to a single director. I do wonder how much of the big dumb action stuff in this movie was required to get the funding and studio backing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 08:44
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:Oh I see. Well Josh at least is a good shot? Still seems like a bizarre complaint to me, every action movie would be over immediately if the shooting was realistic. I was willing to give the movie some leeway, but like, have the shots hit but tink off the armor of the garbage can with legs instead of just missing outright. SOMETHING! SCheeseman posted:But what visuals! I'd love to know how they managed such a low budget. A new, more painful kind of crunch? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_fkAFRPaHQ&hd=1&t=1002s
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 09:37
|
|
|
Why did they use robot bombs on legs to run to the signal flares then explode instead of just you know, launch an exploding missile in the first place like they do the rest of the movie? That was the dumbest hamfist bullshit I've seen in a movie in a while.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 09:51
|
|
|
Robot bombs with legs that think is only the beginning of the problems with "realism" in this movie, you have to give it ALL of the give with silly bullshit like that if you're going to approach it at all. Otherwise it just switches to "why don't they just orbital bombard everything and forgo any boots on the ground if they're serious about stopping alphie". They're clearly already at war and it's even more clear the new asians can't do anything to stop their airforce with how freely they flew everywhere, so why even bother sending in troops? They claim they don't have any friendly outposts within 400 miles yet can drive warehouse-sized land vehicles that move inexorably slowly deep into enemy territory largely unphazed apparently, considering a single anti-tank mine can take them out extremely effectively. The movie falls apart sense-wise if you look at it even remotely rationally, so you just have to accept its going to be stupid and nonsensical about a lot of things. I more and more agree that it is a purely vibes and visuals movie and if you begin to look at it with a critical mind it crumbles to dust
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 10:57
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:All those movies are flawless, though two of them are only pretty good as opposed to great lol it took you this long despite being OP but already had OPinions™
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 12:50
|
|
|
Alan Smithee posted:lol it took you this long despite being OP but already had OPinions™ What does any of this mean?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 14:06
|
|
|
Dad Astra also kicked rear end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 14:33
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:you have a defensive position of a dozen men with automatic rifles(or Lazer guns or whatever) lined up ready to fire. A garbage can with legs audibly comes running in a straight line with no cover directly at them on a bridge. They open fire. One shot lands, the garbage can runs through the entire length of the bridge, through the defenders at point blank, and to its target. They do hit the bombers, tons of shots make that tink sound; they're bullet proof lol Bottom Liner posted:Why did they use robot bombs on legs to run to the signal flares then explode instead of just you know, launch an exploding missile in the first place like they do the rest of the movie? That was the dumbest hamfist bullshit I've seen in a movie in a while. It's a terror tactic - using robots to suicide attack the AI insurgents is extra upsetting to them. Plus a bomb that can climb and navigate obstacles and think (to a limited degree) is obviously useful - suicide bombers aren't normally bullet proof! KVeezy3 posted:What does any of this mean?  you're not supposed to have opinions until a designated time?Alan Smithee posted:lol it took you this long despite being OP but already had OPinions™ If you're willing I'd be interested if you could lay out why you think guardians 3 is a better movie. I'm pretty skeptical but genuinely curious! I don't care about spoilers
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 16:06
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:Robot bombs with legs that think is only the beginning of the problems with "realism" in this movie, you have to give it ALL of the give with silly bullshit like that if you're going to approach it at all. Otherwise it just switches to "why don't they just orbital bombard everything and forgo any boots on the ground if they're serious about stopping alphie". They're clearly already at war and it's even more clear the new asians can't do anything to stop their airforce with how freely they flew everywhere, so why even bother sending in troops? They claim they don't have any friendly outposts within 400 miles yet can drive warehouse-sized land vehicles that move inexorably slowly deep into enemy territory largely unphazed apparently, considering a single anti-tank mine can take them out extremely effectively. It's a simplistic story, but it's not stupid and everything makes perfect sense if you pay attention and think through the implications of what's on screen. The USA is only at war with Harun's insurgents, not New Asia. New Asia is obviously capitalist AF, there's no dispute with America beyond allowing robots to exist and resentment over yankee arrogance. They probably do a ton of business, the R2D2 suicide guys could even be made locally! The USA forces even have military bases on the continent. Nomad Squad kills those NA cops because they'd interfere with their mission, not because they want a war with them too. The super tanks do drive down from the nearest base, yes. That base was too far for Josh and the other survivors of the raid to reach on foot quickly without being caught. Nomad does use they're tactical nukes pretty often, but yes sometimes they use black ops and sometimes "conventional" ground forces instead. It depends on the target and location: Alphie they're willing to capture alive for study if possible, but Nirmata they want confirmed dead. Why don't militaries only use air power and long range bombardment irl? Same reasons, it's not always practical for what you're trying to achieve.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 16:41
|
|
|
The nearest base is 400 miles away, and those tanks are the size of buildings, how would they get to that village without first bulldozing through huge amounts of new Asian territory as well? That seems like something that would be quite off-putting for the government, let alone any locals. I dunno I feel like dropping tactical nukes anywhere on any country would constitute an instantaneous declaration of war, and nomad was getting progressively more hog wild as the movie went on. And then of course the last ditch order the US sent to nomad was to just nuke all the cities Also, question, if nomad was that massive that even only chunks of it were the size of small islands like it showed during the impacts, wouldn't that cause catastrophic damage upon collision with earth? How much damage would a, say, half mile wide meteor do? The impacts of these huge chunks of space base seemed kinda limp for how big those pieces were.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 17:11
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:The USA is only at war with Harun's insurgents, not New Asia. New Asia is obviously capitalist AF, there's no dispute with America beyond allowing robots to exist and resentment over yankee arrogance. The intro video shows the US General explicitly saying that the US is at war with any country that harbors AI, unless I’m mistaken.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 17:11
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:The nearest base is 400 miles away, and those tanks are the size of buildings, how would they get to that village without first bulldozing through huge amounts of new Asian territory as well? That seems like something that would be quite off-putting for the government, let alone any locals. It’s pretty clear that the movie Doesn’t Care about that and I personally don’t see how any of that detracts from the movie.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 17:16
|
|
|
I guess I was curious the whole movie why new asia was totally fine letting the US conduct military operations and drop at least one tactical nuke on its soil without any repercussion or resistance. With all the tech they displayed, why did they have no defenses beyond a superbly incompetent police force? Also the nomad crash thing was more me asking like, it seemed like a super weak impact for something that size and I was curious if anyone here might know what something like that hitting would actually do rather than the small puff of dust it caused in the movie. Not necessarily "oh this should have razed the country how unrealistic" but actual curiosity about something like that crashing into the ground.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 17:31
|
|
|
Like AI, tactical nukes aren't real (yet, and maybe never I don't know). So clearly in this film their use doesn't cause all out war or condemnation. There's all kinds of possible reasons for this - new Asia is in no position to retaliate (except thru their AI allies), the international community has gotten inured to their use, media presents it as normal, everyone is performatively outraged but does nothing, America is isolated and a rogue state, and so on. Lots of possibilities, it's da future baby!dpkg chopra posted:The intro video shows the US General explicitly saying that the US is at war with any country that harbors AI, unless I’m mistaken. Right, but that's a speech for the public that occurs immediately after LA is toasted. It's a decade or so before the events of the film. It's possible there was a hot war with New Asia at first, and that's how the Yanks established their bases and air power (obviously China is not a part of New Asia) - but everything we see is portraying geopolitical circumstances much like the war on terror/late stage capitalism today. Slaves are to be kept in their place, sovereignty be damned, etc Blood Boils fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Oct 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 17:38
|
|
|
Assuming that "New Asia" is an actual polity and not a concept like "Terror" that the US is at war with, you can look at it like the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq where the US took over the country, established bases, set up a provisional government, but still had to deal with an irregular insurgent force, so they constantly blew people up with drone strikes and regularly got into "green/blue" fights with the provisional police if they got in the way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 17:52
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:I guess I was curious the whole movie why new asia was totally fine letting the US conduct military operations and drop at least one tactical nuke on its soil without any repercussion or resistance. With all the tech they displayed, why did they have no defenses beyond a superbly incompetent police force? Uh, the country's militarized police/security forces actually do a really good job of fighting the Americans in the movie, while also tacitly supporting the widespread and well-funded insurgency that successfully defeats the US and wins the war at the end of the film. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Oct 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:Like AI, tactical nukes aren't real (yet, and maybe never I don't know). Tactical nukes are real. We developed a number of low-yield, man-portable nuclear weapons during the Cold War. The Davy Crockett famously used by Boss to destroy Tselinoyarsk in MGS3 was a real weapon we developed but never actually deployed. The only things that make a nuclear weapon "tactical" rather than "strategic" are its lower yield and its intention to be used as a battlefield "tactical" weapon as opposed to being used for the "strategic" purpose of destroying an entire city. It's kind of an absurd distinction, which is one of the reasons why we stopped developing them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 19:12
|
|
|
That's one of the better visual jokes in this. The nuke that partially destroys LA is shown from below, like a scary shadow climbing to heaven. The tactical nukes regularly deployed as punctuation after a raid or whatever are shown from birds eye, a relatively puny little boom.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 19:37
|
|
|
I know movies do this sometimes and I always dislike it but the part where Watanabes character is watching the news and they show a shot of JDW climbing outside of NOMAD that we had seen in the movie as a normal shot mere minutes ago was so hilariously stupid.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
AccountSupervisor posted:I know movies do this sometimes and I always dislike it but the part where Watanabes character is watching the news and they show a shot of JDW climbing outside of NOMAD that we had seen in the movie as a normal shot mere minutes ago was so hilariously stupid. Edwards’ Godzilla is (and other films are) deliberately shot to mimic diegetic footage. The station just has external cameras.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 21:29
|
|
|
They should have gone with the other NOMAD.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 22:05
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Edwards’ Godzilla is (and other films are) deliberately shot to mimic diegetic footage. The station just has external cameras. lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 22:36
|
|
|
Gah, I ended up walking out of it before it was done, it sucks. It looks nice but it's just the stupidest loving plot and paper thin character writing ever. I don't think there wasn't a single line of dialogue that wasn't the obvious nothing-burgher of a comment for any character to make at any given time, and the twists were all obvious and nothing interesting was ever set up or developed. Also, even though it looked nice, I think "80's style cyberpunk rendered in modern fidelity" is getting pretty fuckin' played out. Edit - and I know it's a work of science fiction and you have to just suspend some disbelief or something, but what the gently caress is so special about Nomad? We can blow'd stuff up with missiles right now, and are these "new asian republic" or whatever nation states completely incapable of shooting down the extremely visible and vulnerable air craft loitering in their country for days and days? Jack B Nimble fucked around with this message at 00:12 on Oct 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2023 00:08
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:Oh I see. Well Josh at least is a good shot? Still seems like a bizarre complaint to me, every action movie would be over immediately if the shooting was realistic. Real armies expend thousands of bullets for every actual kill. It’s very realistic for shots to miss constantly, combat is not a firing range.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2023 00:11
|
|
|
the suicide bomb robots are similar to nomad - psychological impact. "yeah, we can build things like you, and they'll thank us for it before blowing themselves up to kill you" if new asia could've shot down nomad, they probably would have. but it seems pretty obvious it hovers in space, drops low to fire missiles, then returns. but the resistance needed alfie to do it which implies they didn't have access to, say, anything else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2023 02:16
|
|
|
Horizon Burning posted:the suicide bomb robots are similar to nomad - psychological impact. "yeah, we can build things like you, and they'll thank us for it before blowing themselves up to kill you" They have all of those Chiba style mega cities and flying cars, but they don't have any ability to police their own air space? It doesn't make any sense - how are they developed enough to have those very large, very futuristic cities, that include lots of flying cars, but they're helpless when Nomad wants to loiter 200 feet over the ground for days? It looks like the director wanted to have Neo Tokyo and also wanted to have Vietnam War, and didn't think too hard about smashing them together. The extra-judicial military actions could theoretically have been done with the tacit approval of the local government (like maybe the terrorists are criminals to them, too), but the police keep showing up to fight a low intensity ground war with the american troops, which ruins that reading.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2023 02:40
|
|
|
Jack B Nimble posted:Gah, I ended up walking out of it before it was done, it sucks. This is a crazy movie to walk out of. This is completely unrelatable. quote:We can blow'd stuff up with missiles right now, and are these "new asian republic" or whatever nation states completely incapable of shooting down the extremely visible and vulnerable air craft loitering in their country for days and days? quote:The extra-judicial military actions could theoretically have been done with the tacit approval of the local government (like maybe the terrorists are criminals to them, too), but the police keep showing up to fight a low intensity ground war with the american troops, which ruins that reading. ephori fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Oct 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2023 04:08
|
|
|
Most countries today have huge sophisticated cities and the latest cars and also don't have air power that can contend with the USA's
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2023 06:49
|
|
|
Nomad hovers or flies slowly at helicopter height for days in a country that both doesn't want the US military there and also defeats their ground forces, so what's special about Nomad that explains why it isn't vulnerable to any attack or retaliation? But the point about america air power today is good, that does make sense. I think more fundamentally a lot of stuff in this movie is just poorly thought out, or poorly explained, or goes the other way and feels lazy and obvious, and you'll be more or less inclined to forgive it if the visuals win you over.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2023 16:38
|
|
|
I liked the visuals and audio sure, but I have nothing to forgive because I didn't find any of the setting confusing or nonsensical. I understand some of the complaints about the story (it feels both overstuffed and cut down sometimes), but the tactical realism criticisms are, as usual, much dumber than the movie itself! Edit: like, hostile helicopters aren't always shot down, so what does Nomad's height have to do with anything? They probably do some risk evaluations before changing elevations Blood Boils fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Oct 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 09:13 |
|
|
I could be overreacting to Nomad because I didn't like the movie; the point about how the real US military is a good one and I suppose I'm wrong about that. Even so, my real complaints are with the characters and the dialogue. I think "serviceable" is too charitable, they're paper thin and poorly. It's almost like the movie filmed "placeholder dialogue", they way movies have stand in VFX shots.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2023 17:01
|
|