(Thread IKs:
Roth)
|
Rebel Moon is crazily 40k influenced. Specifically, late-90s/early-2000s 40k - where all the battle art was of guys screaming, shooting lasers in 1000 directions, and waving huge rear end flags. It's Zack Snyder's theatrical cut of the Dawn of War 1 intro video. I didn't like it very much though. The only thing that really stood out as done well was the tailoring and costume design. I'm not sure if Netflix has a really awesome staff for that or standards are just really high lately because a lot of productions are hitting it out of the park. Rebel Moon doesn't know what it wants to be. It feels like an ill thought out pastiche of several other films, with not much consideration given to making the parts fit together in a way that made sense. (I think this is the root of the 'AI-written' criticisms.) Rebel Moon wants to be an epic Star Wars story of the fate of the galaxy at the same time as it wants to be Seven Samurai, which is a much lower stakes adventure. Combining the two results in weird thematic disconnects and a lot of poo poo that doesn't make sense. The imperial dreadnought is a WORLD DESTROYER that can and does destroy whole civilizations. But the ultimate conflict we're building towards is that massive WORLD DESTROYER vs some shithole farming village. ????? Imagine if Star Wars Ep IV had culminated in the epic battle of the Death Star vs the Beru & Lars Farmstead. The aesthetics are all over the place. The waterfall coming off the top of the mountain at the start sets the mood, but it gets weirder from there. For example, the port town of Providence is contradictory in its aesthetics. The town occupies a similar place in the plot as Mos Eisley does in Star Wars; an apparently lawless port city filled with villains and sailors. Mos Eisley is a sprawling settlement, where the only law is the rough and brutal enforcement of Imperial law by soldiers. Providence in contrast is a walled off square town, with not a single building outside the clean (and fairly ornamental) walls. Its orderly appearance suggests it is regimented and controlled, which is completely opposite to the lawless rapey hellhole it is shown to be in practice. As far as I can tell, Providence is a result of copying the aesthetic of the Japanese films in the pastiche without regard to aesthetic contradictions it imparts to the film. Another thing Rebel Moon can't figure out is kings. Under the kings, the empire of the Motherworld is an all-consuming maw that engages in endless wars for resources. Scratch that, it engages in endless wars for no reason at all, because all we hear about is them constantly destroying whole planets. Yet the place the royal family occupies in the story is that of the previous Good Government that has been usurped by the fascist villains of the setting. You have your pure innocent princess who is MIA, you have the robot telling stories of how she was the hope for the future and peace and justice etc, and how the robots refuse to fight without a good princess to fight for. Which is it, Zack? Make up your mind! Perhaps Rebel Moon could have been better with more run time... but I doubt it. So much of the film was wasted on pointless action scenes. What Star Wars accomplishes with one flash of a lightsaber and a mean look takes Rebel Moon dozens of blaster shots in a long, dragging gunfight sequence. TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Jan 10, 2024 |
#
¿
Jan 10, 2024 22:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 19:14 |
|
|
I read somewhere that Snyder regards the PG-13 version as 'almost an alternate universe version' of the R-rated cut. Not sure what that even means, precisely. Possibly the R cut has a lot more focus on sexual violence, aka, good filmmaking as far as Snyder is concerned.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2024 02:53
|
|
|
they kinda put the whole movie in the trailer edit: looking at that trailer again i guess the finale of rebel moon part 2 is admiral noble having a sword fight with kora while his ship blows up, same as part 1. an idea so good we're doin it twice TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Mar 21, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2024 07:16
|
|
|
Jimbot posted:Nitpicking the logic of the technology of a fantasy sci-fi universe is some real loser stuff. That same ship also had coal-fired furnaces below the naked lady Giger-like statue with a bunch of techno lights coming out of it. That's just how the tech is. Like we get it, you don't like the film. Just say say that, you don't need to be a weirdo about it. didn't it blow up a city in part 1? that's just what we saw. narratively, it destroyed a world; characters similarly called it a 'world destroyer'. the technology doesn't need to make sense but it should at least be vaguely consistent in its presentation. it is actually important for the narrative for it to do so, as characters motivations and reactions to events (and thus their characterization) makes little sense whatsoever if their context is unmoored and infinitely mutable. the inevitable end result is that characters and events stop having consistency beyond the length of individual scenes, which is a problem that plagues modern action films. TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Apr 20, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2024 19:02
|
|
|
People being kinda weirdly aggressively personal ITT. Tomato score is far from perfect but if there's better metric for what wider opinion of a movie is plz share. its just a movie. noones posting about the lil white cuck ball~
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2024 23:24
|
|