Page 218 of 235 FirstFirst ... 118168208216217218219220228 ... LastLast
Results 2,171 to 2,180 of 2341

Thread: I just saw...

  1. #2171
    No Thank You Blorg's Avatar
    Type
    INFP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    near Lidl
    Posts
    4,261
    Hereditary. Has anyone else seen it?

    It was really scary. I dislike the gore because it keeps popping back into my head days after I saw it. I loved the visuals otherwise, the dollhouse theme and vaguely stop-motion editing.

    Thought it went downhill thematically. Near the beginning, there's this heart-stopping moment, and I feel like one movie ended shortly after it. For the next twenty minutes, there were occasional scares, but the writers/directors seemed to be "thinking aloud" about where to go next. And then the last 10 minutes were secondhand David Lynch. Super scary, but lacking in depth, like they couldn't get to the heart of that trauma near the beginning or find a path for it.

    This was also what annoyed me about The Haunting of Hill House. There's the magical layer, and then the psychological layer in both this movie and that series. I always feel like there's a problem when I spend too much time thinking about which parts indicate a psychological "reality" that exists beneath the magic, rather than being fully immersed in the story and accepting that the magical and psychological features are part of one seamless whole. Especially near the end of Hereditary, there was be a massive disjunction between the underlying psychological "reality" of the mom and the nature of her role in the magic.

    This turn wasn't surprising to me, because I could tell from the beginning that the directors/writers lacked real empathy for her character, so they felt no qualms about eventually throwing her psychology out the window for the sake of monsters (scary and graphic, but not heart-stopping like the event near the beginning). A rare example of a horror movie that actually emphasizes with the traumatized mum is Under the Shadow. It's not as scary as Hereditary though.

  2. #2172
    chaotic neutral shitpost jigglypuff's Avatar
    Type
    xxxx
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    shrubland
    Posts
    8,113
    love and mercy (2014) - i forgot my original opinion of this movie, but watching this again, i love it.

  3. #2173
    Senior Member Limes's Avatar
    Type
    INTJ
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,567
    Star Trek Discovery Season two.

    I enjoyed season one. The characters were taking a bit of getting used to, but I enjoyed the tech, (nacelle geek) the budget seemed good and the storyline was engaging.

    Season two has rolled along and I didn't even get through the entire opening episode. It's like they took everything that was a bit annoying about the last season and amplified the shit out of it. I can almost imagine a meeting where they decided they were going to take a shit on the franchise.

    The virtue signalling is off the chart. I don't give a shit what sex, colour, or nationality they choose to make the lead character, I'm more interested in character depth, their ability to act their part and the plotline. But this season seems to have taken an annoying liberty with the character, she has to be smarter than a Vulcan, schooling them in logic and strategy, she has to be a better pilot than the others, tougher than the toughest etc. Her acting range seems to have just three facial expressions, a little similar to Will Smith with his kicked dog expression. Worse acting from Michelle Yeoh. I think she got killed off pretty early (with her terrible acting) but threatens to return. I won't stick around for that.

    Cadet Tilly. For some reason, they decided to go with a Jordy LaForge character with autism (She self describes "because of my special needs" - this whole fucking show is special needs. It's just fucking annoying. Why does almost every character have to be some special concession to virtue signalling. I preferred the more elitist enterprise having the best of the best (and still diversity), but now apparently, there's a giant check list of special interest groups to be appeased to have an inclusive television show and we have to have autistic characters now too. Also, she dropped the first "fuck" in star Trek history. How edgy.

    There is not one single likable character. The male characters need to be put down to make the female characters look better instead of serving on their own merit. Issues like "mansplaining" and race have become an issue in this rendition of the franchise. The Michael Burnham character is profoundly unlikable. Apparently the enterprise and even the uniforms had to be altered to be 25% different from the originals.

    I agree with this take: https://youtu.be/EbrWyrYpqKA?t=54

    It was awful.
    Avoid.

  4. #2174
    Senior Member Senseye's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,324
    I tend to agree. Even last year I was getting sick of the gay dudes. And Yeoh is back.

    I'll probably keep slogging along and hope the story line comes around a bit, but it's been a lame season so far.

  5. #2175
    Moderator Thoth's Avatar
    Type
    INFP
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    AHJ 2006
    Posts
    1,092
    STD, is an appropriate acronym for Star Trek Discovery.

    Setting aside all the entirely valid arguments for and against social agenda pushing in STD, and the absolute travesty they call Klingons (sorry, had to inject a little bias there), the show fails on the most quintessential of aspects that is supposed to define Star Trek. The Discovery's crew does not come off as intelligent, resourceful and accomplished space explorers working as a team, they come off as a gaggle of special needs children flailing their personal idiosyncrasies in a fungal powered spaceship.

  6. #2176
    Quote Originally Posted by Thoth View Post
    STD, is an appropriate acronym for Star Trek Discovery.

    Setting aside all the entirely valid arguments for and against social agenda pushing in STD, and the absolute travesty they call Klingons (sorry, had to inject a little bias there), the show fails on the most quintessential of aspects that is supposed to define Star Trek. The Discovery's crew does not come off as intelligent, resourceful and accomplished space explorers working as a team, they come off as a gaggle of special needs children flailing their personal idiosyncrasies in a fungal powered spaceship.
    Spoiler: Observations with some spoilers


    Tilly and Lt. Broccoli were made for each other. Someone should lock them in a remotely located holodeck together, let them think it is reality, put them into situations to showcase their terrible decision making skills, and then use the resulting footage as "blood on the highway" style cautionary training videos for first year star fleet recruits. Might make a good web series, ha.

    Tilly keeps getting gold stars for effort when the reality is that her decisions should get her booted out of star fleet, but it's their fault for putting her into roles that she has absolutely no natural inclination for. Almost everything she says and does should disqualify her for any kind of leadership role in any paramilitary organization. Instead they are grooming her as an officer? Jesus, that's like asking George Burns to star in striptease ... he was a great performer, but wrong fucking skill set. They are setting her up for massive failure because leadership is just not her strength. Not everyone is cut out for that.She's apparently got gobs of learning in lots of really complex made-up-for-the-show physics type things, and that's not nothing. They could very easily have made a case for her as someone who's brains make them an important addition in spite of the fact that they are a bit mental. It's not like you are required to be a great leader to be a great scientist.

    They rewarded tilly after she consciously and deliberately tried to hide the fact that she was seeing things out of fear that it would harm her career or fear that people wouldn't like her or something, even though her decision to do so almost cost everyone their lives.

    I initially felt like the main character's redemption was unrealistic until the truth came out about the facilitator of her redemption and his impetus for it. Then it seemed more realistic.

    I really like the Jet Reno character. I'd love it if she was the protag. I imagine her point of view and observations about the crew would be more brutal than anything we could come up with. I love the concept of her being an engineer who sees no distinction between organisms and machines, even though that last episode had some clunky writing in the implementation of that concept.

    They gave the Klingons their hair back in season 2. It helps.

    Giant tardigrades....fungus? God dammit, just make up new stuff, and when describing the new stuff, say, "It's similar to a mycelial network" rather than "It is a mycelial network." I mean come on, we can google tardigrades and mycelium. That severely limits what you can say about them and makes suspension of disbelief more difficult, not less. Not everything we find in space has to come from earth. That's the point of doing a show in space...you can have non earth stuff. (Star Trek Voyager was the worst about this).

    But I still love Star Trek. I wouldn't get this worked up if I didn't care.

    I think a lot of these things stem from one thing...many modern show writers don't seem to understand the dynamics of military and paramilitary organizations well enough to write characters that could realistically function inside these structures. This happens in a lot of television and movie sci fi. For example Poe Dameron, mere pilot grunt, knocking on the general's door with his critique of her plan. He's not ranked enough to be privy to the tactical discussions, but he's able to knock on the general's door and tell her what he thinks she should do. Everyone spends a lot of time angry at one or both of those characters for their REactions to these interactions, but the anger is misplaced. The fault does not lie in the characters. They are placed in an impossible situation. These interactions couldn't have realistically happened in the first place, therefore there is no right way to react to them. Whenever something happens as a result of the writers ignoring protocols that would be in place in order to force an emotional interaction, everything that happens downstream of that moment is tainted, and eventually, as the story lines progress, it becomes a tangle of shit that would never have happened in a star fleet vessel, or a militarily organized rebellion. But there is no reason there can't be emotional interactions within the protocols. It's like they don't even try to have people act like they are in a chain of command except when it suits the plot to implement it for a second.

    Another example, this one specifically for starfleet, not for all military..the pilot that dies is a total douchebag in a non-red shirt. He won't listen to anyone, and is almost exactly the same person as the redshirt who died on the drilling platform in the startrek movie reboot because he wouldn't open his chute when kirk and sulu said so. Seriously, how did these people graduate star fleet academy. In a well written script, they wouldn't have. We wouldn't have the opportunity to show the audience how bad douchebaggy showboaters are because douchebaggy showboaters who won't listen to anyone don't get to drive the experimental shuttlecraft thingy. You can use a mud character for that sort of showcasing if you want, but you undermine the entire concept of starfleet as an organization that only the very best can be in when you let a uniformed graduate of starfleet showcase it.

    Edit: And don't even get me started on Michael fucking the freed pow who, as far as everyone knows at the time, is barely hanging on mentally due to flashbacks of all the abuse, all while playing the role of an abusive captain, then acting like the victim when it goes sideways. Sometimes when you do stupid shit, you get what you get...and that one should have gotten Michael booted from starfleet...again.
    Last edited by Sistamatic; 02-12-2019 at 09:32 PM.
    Insults are effective only where emotion is present. -- Spock, "Who Mourns for Adonais?" Stardate 3468.1.

    It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -- Aristotle

  7. #2177
    Senior Member Sinny's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    5,357
    Yeah, I don't think STD is half as good as it's predecessors.
    Those who begin coercive elimination of dissent soon find themselves exterminating dissenters. Compulsory unification of opinion achieves only the unanimity of the graveyard.

    ~ Robert Jackson, Statesman (1892-1954)


  8. #2178
    Moderator Thoth's Avatar
    Type
    INFP
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    AHJ 2006
    Posts
    1,092
    Kingdom "Season One"

    I've been off the zombie fandom train for about two years now, but someone I know highly recommended this show none the less. I can say he was not wrong, Kingdom is a far superior flavor of Fear the Walking Dead. It has all the expected tropes, but captures the Day Zero suspense FtWD never achieved (I found FtWD mind-numbingly boring). There really is only one caveat, you have to be amiable to foreign period settings as Kingdom takes place in early 1600s Korea.

  9. #2179
    chaotic neutral shitpost jigglypuff's Avatar
    Type
    xxxx
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    shrubland
    Posts
    8,113
    breaking bad, s4e9

    i just finished this episode and i'm not done with this season yet but i'm getting so frustrated watching this. while it's understandable he feels he can't trust anyone, walt has no idea how much jesse has done for him. omfg.

    also skyler is one of my favorite characters.
    i sneeze like a grandpa.

  10. #2180
    TJ TeresaJ's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    mosquito-infested hell
    Posts
    3,978
    Isle of Dogs

    Wes Anderson films are always hit or miss to me. This one's definitely a miss. What's unusual is that it's not a miss because I hate the characters, which is the usual reason I dislike the ones I dislike.

    This one felt like... What's that party game where you pick random words to complete a story? Plug in dogs, Japan, and stop animation into a cliche exaggeration of a "Wes Anderson film" and you get this movie. He honestly didn't have to be involved in it at all. Film school students assigned the task of making a Wes Anderson film could have pulled this off. The script itself just felt so so lazy.

    I also watched this one with my son, which perhaps made it extra cringey. He liked it. I was like, this is going to give you nightmares, some of this language is inappropriate, and seriously every woman is either a sex object or a mother figure.

    He loved it. My son.

    For me it makes me question why I like the Wes Anderson films I do like. The royal tenenbaums, the life aquatic. I even quite enjoyed the Grand Budapest Hotel. But are they all just stylishly executed boy adventurer fantasies?

    ...Perhaps I'm answering my own question. Yes, they are all stylishly executed boy adventurer fantasies. Some ring true to a deeper complexity and some don't.

    Further thoughts: I think part of the reason I dislike this one and Moonrise Kingdom in particular is that the protagonists in each are actually children. It's one thing if you are portraying adults who are still hung up on some of the more grandiose fantasies of childhood while simultaneously navigating the problems of adult life. That to me is sympathetic and interesting. But if you take away that reflective layer and it's just a straight up boys' adventure taken with adult seriousness... I just... hate it. It's either ... cruelly disingenuous or snidely ego-inflating.

    I disliked it before I had a son and now that I am the mother of a young son I'm almost disgusted by it.

    Contrasted with where the wild things are, which treated fantasies as such.
    Last edited by TeresaJ; 02-17-2019 at 03:50 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •