(Thread IKs:
Roth)
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:That is his real accent. Not even close. He's from Newcastle
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 10:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 13:38 |
|
|
I like the idea thst you can only have a northern irish accent in a film if you're going to be a witty little leprechaun fucker. Forbidden otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 10:06
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:That is his real accent. https://youtu.be/2cEAtTdIFtw?si=zfrVsTfpROkhcU4m Ya'll should petition Snyder to use Hunnam's "perfect" NI dialect in the unrated cut.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 10:09
|
|
|
josh04 posted:I like the idea thst you can only have a northern irish accent in a film if you're going to be a witty little leprechaun fucker. Forbidden otherwise. This guy gets it
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 11:11
|
|
|
to be honest I don't get "suspension of disbelief". I like thinking about the things I am watching - I don't see the need to "forget" I am watching or reading or playing something. someone constructed an art to convey something important to them! why would I want to forget that they exist and made an art I am consuming?!
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 11:31
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:to be honest I don't get "suspension of disbelief". I like thinking about the things I am watching - I don't see the need to "forget" I am watching or reading or playing something. someone constructed an art to convey something important to them! why would I want to forget that they exist and made an art I am consuming?! There's a difference between thinking about things in a "I wonder what is going to happen in this universe" or: "Wow, that was an interesting line, what are all the ramifacations of that bit of dialogue?" and:: "Hold the phone, that doesn't make sense" The first examples are things you would think when you are immersed in the film and engaged in the storytelling. The second example is when you've snapped back to reality and gone: "Wait, I'm watching a dumb movie"
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 11:43
|
|
|
Caros posted:The worst example of this bad choreography is the spider. Their climactic duel comes to a close as she chokes the life out of her opponent and... She is stabbed in the chest. By the laser swords her opponent was holding the whole fight. The ending of that fight only worjs if you, like the spider, lack object permanence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 11:45
|
|
|
no story can survive sufficiently rigorous inspection. how much inspection a story gets seems to depend on how much the viewer likes it I think "suspension of disbelief" tends to obscure analysis by adding an additional layer ("what is disbelief" "how does a text suspend it" "how does a text break it" "why does it matter" etc etc). it would be simpler to say e.g. the action scenes lacked weight/stakes and just dislike it for that reason
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 11:51
|
|
|
josh04 posted:I like the idea thst you can only have a northern irish accent in a film if you're going to be a witty little leprechaun fucker. Forbidden otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 12:20
|
|
|
No Kora, I think you will find it is YOU who have betrayed ME.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 12:29
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:no story can survive sufficiently rigorous inspection. how much inspection a story gets seems to depend on how much the viewer likes it The same thing applies for any sleight-of-hand or magic trick. If you see a move, it'll ruin the trick even if you can't explain the move, just knowing it's there is enough to make you go "Oh wait this is a trick" Meanwhile, if you don't see anything, when the reveal happens it'll land and for a brief moment you'll think: "gently caress that was magic!" This is a really good example of the ruinous impact of spotting plot-armour on main characters. In 300, you didn't REALLY see the plot armour. So every time the 300 Spartans dived head-first into battle against thousands of Persians, you were enthralled because you could buy into the illusion that somebody you cared about could die in that attack. You could shut up that pedantic nerd in the back of you head going: "HE'S ONE OF LEONIDAS' BEST FRIENDS AND WE ARE ONLY 20 MINUTES IN." It made those battles really exciting to watch because the odds were stacked so high against the people we cared about, the danger seemed real. Did that mean the movie was realistic? poo poo no. But everything was saw made sense in the world that the narrative existed in and everything made sense for what we saw. The movie established that the 300 Spartans were well-trained, super awesome hardcore soldiers. Meanwhile, we knew the Persians were cannon fodder. So while it made sense that the Spartans would cut through the Persians like butter, doing super fancy and elaborate (and loving cool) moves, we could see how ridiculously outnumbered they were. We could see how chaotic the battles were, and they felt like insanely dangerous places to be. WHILE I'M AT IT: The characters of 300 were so much more engaging, charismatic and fun. AGAIN: NOT REALISTIC, I don't think any Greeks spoke with a Scottish accent, but Gerard Butler was so goddamn engaging you didn't give a fuuuuuck. He was a general who screamed: "FOR TONIGHT WE DINE IN HELL" and the audience thought poo poo yeah we do!. Gerard Butler was engaging and likeable as gently caress in 300 and way cooler than anybody we saw in Rebel Moon. (Note: I actually thought Admiral Noble (gag) was a fun psychopath) Meanwhile in Rebel Moon, when spider-queen picks up lightsaber girl to snarl at her while lightsaber girl...still had her lightsabers? Like did anybody watch that and think: "OH NO! THIS LIGHSABER GIRL IS ABOUT TO GET EAT BY SPIDER LADY" or did we all go: "She gonna get stabbed by lights-uh...plasma swords." If you're asking for a quantifiable thing that you can point at and say: "X is a thing which will always\never ruin suspension of belief" you're going to be disappointed. That's what makes cinema an art form rather than something that can be effectively generated by AI. But it comes down to a little bit of everything. It comes down to in-world consistency, presentation of the characters, illusion of danger, an understanding of the power of the good guys vs. bad guys in the current scene (and overall), the acting, the choreography, honestly about 10% of everything contributes to that suspension of disbelief. However: Snyder in Rebel Moon used some sort of a fight to introduce most of the main characters. Mechanically, going into that, the audience is going to be aware that this fight is going to be used to demonstrate the character's strength against an opponent. At that point in time, we have known said character for 15 seconds. We do not give a gently caress about the character. We do not give a gently caress about the reason why they are fighting, nor do we really know the stakes. So pretty much the only thing we HAVE to believe in the character, the flm, the narrative or anything, comes down to the strength of the fight choreography. Now if in that choreography, it looks like said character is being allowed to win, we as the audience do not believe in the character. That character didn't have an rear end-kicking moment, we don't feel they triumphed over adversity, we kinda feel like we just had our time wasted in a very expensive, flashy fancy way for 5 minutes. This has a knock-on effect for the rest of the film, 'cos when we see that character we are explicitly reminded that the plot will kill them, not the dangers that they are facing. Ergo, the dangers that they are facing...no longer have any threat value. ...which makes all action sequences featuring said character kinda meaningless. You're not waiting to see if the danger will kill them, you're waiting to see if the plot will. That's a massive difference in terms of engagement and immersion. If you're worried about the danger the characters are facing? You're engaged in the movie, the characters, the narrative and you have...suspended disbelief. If you're waiting for the plot to kill them, you haven't engaged in any of that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 12:29
|
|
|
In this illusion-based theory of cinematic pleasure, how do you account for the act of watching a movie twice? Is it a necessarily diminished process, the hawkish nerd ever in the corner of your mind screaming that you know how this one goes? That the illusion of peril is a total sham? Does Raiders of the Lost Ark suck that little bit more because you know you bought a five-set?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 12:35
|
|
|
josh04 posted:In this illusion-based theory of cinematic pleasure, how do you account for the act of watching a movie twice? Is it a necessarily diminished process, the hawkish nerd ever in the corner of your mind screaming that you know how this one goes? That the illusion of peril is a total sham? Does Raiders of the Lost Ark suck that little bit more because you know you bought a five-set? Each time you re-watch a movie, it is less enjoyable compared to the previous time you watched it. This...is one of the most obvious statements ever? But if the illusion of danger is constructed well enough, it'll still work on some level on repeated viewings. It's the illusion you enjoy moreso than the outcome. So even if you know the outcome (or even if you can sort of predict it on some level on the first viewing), as long as that doesn't interfere with the illusion itself, it's still great fun. Like, when you re-watch the scariest movie you've ever seen? You'd have to be kidding yourself to get scared at the same bits as you did the first time right? ...That's exactly what you're doing. You're allowing yourself to believe in the illusion and you're believing in what you're seeing. However, it's REAL hard to do that when the plot armour is blatantly obvious and super visible even on the first watching. Like if you're watching something that's supposed to be scary, but the ENTIRE TIME you can see something which is highlighting, underlining and reminding you that the characters are going to be fine, then there's absolutely no illusion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 12:58
|
|
|
H13 posted:Each time you re-watch a movie, it is less enjoyable compared to the previous time you watched it. What? No it's not
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 13:56
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 14:05
|
|
|
I also thought this movie was terrible for the same reasons posted above, but I don’t think anyone’s mentioned the horrible dialogue yet. Every character seemed to speak with the same voice and every line was much too complex/convoluted. No one just spoke casually. There were some really long flowery almost run-on sentence lines that kept taking me out of scenes. Combine that with some of the actors’ accents and it made me think that their characters would never speak like that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 14:37
|
|
|
I haven't seen the movie yet but it's a masterpiece. I know because it says "zack snyder" on it
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 15:06
|
|
|
kalel posted:I haven't seen the movie yet but it's a masterpiece. I know because it says "zack snyder" on it
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 15:08
|
|
|
oops, double post
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 15:18
|
|
|
Thread’s getting many of lengthy posts from people who don’t usually go to the movie forum, mulling over ideas like ‘the basic concept of fiction’, so it seems like the movie’s a success. Like when Snyder Cut came out, and people were suddenly really interested in aspect ratios.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 15:18
|
|
|
Stegosnaurlax posted:Also, Charlie Hunnam is pointlessly Northern Irish. I can except that the accent isn't good because it's space and it does't need to be, but he's missing the witt that makes the accent charming Considering what the character said the empire did to his people, I don't think so. Edit: What I'm basically saying is that people with English accents have a history of doing not nice things to those with Irish accents, even if that specific event I linked isn't what they were thinking about when they were making creative decisions about the character. Jimbot fucked around with this message at 15:52 on Dec 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 15:21
|
|
|
H13 posted:Each time you re-watch a movie, it is less enjoyable compared to the previous time you watched it. Going one further, would this make docudramas the most effective form of narrative? Because the viewer can have absolute confidence of the illusion before watching? Or else, are docudramas not worth watching at all - the craft of illusion being necessarily absent? When I watch Gotti, am I more engaged because I know the real Gotti was never killed by the mob? Or less engaged?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 15:24
|
|
|
H13 posted:Each time you re-watch a movie, it is less enjoyable compared to the previous time you watched it. A strange way to experience cinema or any form of entertainment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 15:30
|
|
|
JazzFlight posted:I also thought this movie was terrible for the same reasons posted above, but I don’t think anyone’s mentioned the horrible dialogue yet. Every character seemed to speak with the same voice and every line was much too complex/convoluted. No one just spoke casually. There were some really long flowery almost run-on sentence lines that kept taking me out of scenes. Combine that with some of the actors’ accents and it made me think that their characters would never speak like that. Well no, normal people wouldn't speak like that, it's a bit too dramatic or theatrical for everyday speech, but we're not watching a documentary about space farmers, we're watching a space opera, so it's not so strange people would speak in a bit of a flourish. Personally i liked it, even if I can understand why it would be a bit of a turnoff. I loved Kai's line about not even making it into the history books, and Bloodaxes little speech to rally his troops, and pretty much everything Admiral Noble said.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 15:47
|
|
|
Could someone please map out the diminishing returns of re-watches in graph form? I’m a visual learner
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 16:01
|
|
|
Ah well you start with 1 whole suspender of disbelief but each time you watch a film you lose 10%, unless there is a non British accent in the film which causes a 5x multiplier on disbeliefs. Also every time a bullet misses a hero that’s another disbelief though these are addictive and then multiplied by accents at the end. Here’s my 2 hour YouTube video analysis where I explain this. Or check out my 70 part twitter thread.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 16:12
|
|
|
the actual problem is Noble's outfit. his suspenders of disbelief took me right out of the movie
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:03
|
|
|
This movie is bad and I can’t tell if those you that like it are joking or not. It’s a dumb version of Seven Samurai with a piss poor understanding of the Roman Empire on top of it. The only way this could have worked if it Synder had gone all in on his fascism love and made the Rebels old school religious traditionalist fighting against the Federation from Star Trek.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:08
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:This movie is bad and I can’t tell if those you that like it are joking or not. lol yeah it sure can be hard to tell who is being disingenuous!
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:19
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:The only way this could have worked if it Synder had gone all in on his fascism love and made the Rebels old school religious traditionalist fighting against the Federation from Star Trek. This film is Joss Whedon's Serenity
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:19
|
|
|
Thank you for the engagement. You ensured this thread remains on page 1 and that Rebel Moon remains as a #1 release. Service guarantees citizenship. Welcome citizen. Once again, Zack Snyder remains winning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:24
|
|
|
H13 posted:Each time you re-watch a movie, it is less enjoyable compared to the previous time you watched it. Why stop there? Clearly even the very knowledge of what a "movie" is is a threat to your enjoyment; nobody else in history has truly appreciated a film the way the people who dived out of the way of the train in L’Arrivée d’un train en gare de La Ciotat did. With this in mind, there is really nowhere more dangerous to your future enjoyment of cinema than a movie discussion forum -- you should flee this place, now! Quick, before you learn something about artifice!
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:28
|
|
|
Honestly surprised it took this long for the "Snyder loves fascism" take to rear its embarrassingly stupid head.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:28
|
|
|
YggdrasilTM posted:That was my breaking point too. That whole fight didn't make any sense. But it’s important to keep in mind that the spider woman was doomed already. First we know that mining has killed her offspring likely making her the last of her kind. Next, she approaches initially trying to bargain saying that her path of terrorism is justified. And even if she kills Nemesis, Kora has her gun ready to shoot the spider. Really the end is just the spider making sure her executioner looks her in the eye one last time. Maybe a hope for her cause to be remembered, a new reason to fight. Maybe a final acknowledgment that terrorism isn’t the path.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:36
|
|
|
The early shot of Kora farming in front of the moon beats anything in Villeneuve's Dune. Gorgeous movie. Snyder is at his best when aiming for mythic bombast and this has a lot of really interesting things going on. Not sure it entirely coheres, but it's a palimpsest of sci fi and fantasy inspirations and I love that there's a full on beast master/ clash of the titans sequence alongside a star wars cantina scene etc. the finale was a little underwhelming compared to say, A New Hope.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:39
|
|
|
So its pretty clear at this point all the character background is in Part 2. Weird way of structuring this all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf16jEmvJUY
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:41
|
|
|
H13 posted:Snyder in Rebel Moon used some sort of a fight to introduce most of the main characters. No he didn’t. I’m pretty sure Nemesis is the only one of them that’s primarily introduced via a fight. Kora is introduced farming, and it takes over 30 minutes before we see her fight. Gunnar has even longer before he’s involved in any action. Jimmy is introduced via a series of interactions that are specifically about how he REFUSES to fight. Tarak is introduced via the bennu breaking sequence, which is certainly an action scene but I don’t know that I’d call it a FIGHT at all, as it’s about him creating a bond with the bennu. Titus, Devra, and Darrian are all introduced via scenes that feature the team appealing to their sense of guilt for their past actions. I guess maybe you could say that Kai is introduced with a fight, but he’s really not, IMO, because the first thing we see him do happens a good few minutes before his contribution to the cantina brawl, and it’s a FAR more important moment that goes to defining his character.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 17:42
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:This movie is bad and I can’t tell if those you that like it are joking or not. It’s a dumb version of Seven Samurai with a piss poor understanding of the Roman Empire on top of it. Depiction isn’t endorsement you dumb prick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 18:22
|
|
|
checkplease posted:I do think the end of the fight isn’t edited the best and hoping the longer cut cleans it up. I agree, we all know she’s still got two swords in free hands. I'm hoping the r rated takes show this better, like if we see more of a focus on Nemesis' face to get a reaction or maybe hesitation even as she's being strangled. Like I got it as a microcosm of a bad end for the colonized and a doomed land. And while telling a story like that through a fight isn't easy Snyder is usually really good at getting characterization out of fight scenes. So it stood out as a really odd moment. Tarak lol, there being a Conan the barbarian space gryphon cowboy, that was awesome, I just wish they took the bird with them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 13:38 |
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Thread’s getting many of lengthy posts from people who don’t usually go to the movie forum, mulling over ideas like ‘the basic concept of fiction’, so it seems like the movie’s a success. Lol seriously now I’m reading posts about “suspension of disbelief” Lmfao
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2023 18:33
|
|
