|
Livingston posted:I don't think he was worrying about blame at all. I think he was rightly flipping out because he had been unwittingly loving his own daughter! I can see being shocked, but his reaction is just too much. The person solely responsible is right in front of him, too. I don't want to complain about it too much because it's probably some cultural thing, it just makes absolutely no sense to me.
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2011 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 09:39 |
|
|
It's not a cultural thing. It was loving weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2011 22:11
|
|
|
Fast Five was mentioned earlier in the tread for its destruction in the last chase scene, but that type of thing doesn't bother me. What really made me lose all focus on the movie was The Rock's waterfall-like sweat. Every time the camera showed his face, all I could see were these giant beads flowing down his forehead into his mouth, where every time he spoke it caused him to do his best impression of Sylvester from Looney Tunes. Even in scenes where the other characters were not sweating and they were in, most likely, a room with some type of air conditioning this happened. I saw this in theaters with my friends and got stuck in the front row, which may have exacerbated the whole issue, and I soon expected it to be like that interactive Alien ride from Disney World, where they spray you with mist to make you feel like you are in the scene.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2011 22:16
|
|
|
Eclipse12 posted:Or that perhaps the girlfriend is impaled by a piece of metal and shrugs it off? Starship troopers did the same stupid thing. It came up at least once if not twice in one of the commentaries. That commentary often devolved into Neil Patrick Harris, Dina Meyer, and Casper van Dien making fun of a sputtering, increasingly-accented Paul Verhoeven. It was a pretty fun watch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2011 22:47
|
|
|
Thoughtless posted:I can see being shocked, but his reaction is just too much. The person solely responsible is right in front of him, too. Mu Zeta posted:It's not a cultural thing. It was loving weird. I thought his reaction was pretty appropriate. The reason he reacted the way he did was because a)He realised that both the antagonist's misery and by extension his own (and the misery of several others including his daughter) was the fault of his own actions. He didn't kill the man 'responsible' because the man responsible was himself and his rumor instigating tongue. b)He freaked out because the only thing that he could do (killing the antagonist would have served no purpose whatsoever) to stop the long list of tragic events that led to this point was to convince the antagonist not to tell his daughter about her origin, thus putting an end to any further misery before it would be allowed to completely corrupt the girl. Nothing else mattered. And the hypnosis, well, that was just a plot device.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2011 22:55
|
|
|
Aliens, Predator, or any 80s action movie. Hey we're highly trained marines/commandos or whatever. Should we aim our weapons? gently caress no lets hip-fire that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2011 23:14
|
|
|
zVxTeflon posted:Aliens, Predator, or any 80s action movie. Hey we're highly trained marines/commandos or whatever. Should we aim our weapons? gently caress no lets hip-fire that poo poo. I like it when Carl Weathers fires his gun at a 90 degree angle for some loving reason:  That just seems wildly impractical.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2011 23:28
|
|
|
The daughter loving got me thinking. In Watchmen, when does the Comedian figure out he's Laurie' father? There's never any mention of the Hooded Justice being her mom's boyfriend, but Sally's manager does point out it isn't his kid. So when did the Comedian find out, and why? Did Sally Jupiter tell him before she retired? We can assume he had nothing at all to do with her or the girl until that meeting of the Watchmen when he looked actually, for once, not an rear end in a top hat and covered the story with 'old friend's daughter' rather than 'can't a guy talk to his daughter?' In the movie, in the opening when Adrian is clearly enjoying kicking the poo poo out of the Comedian, we see photos of both Sally and Laurie, as an adult, in his apartment. So was there any real emotions beyond 'hey, I hosed your mom?' or is it just some other grand joke of the Comedian that isn't explained?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 00:50
|
|
|
Saw Wrecked last night. Good movie, very atmospheric, and Adrien Brody does the one-man show really well. The filmmakers did something that annoys the crap out of me in movies, though. Brody has a dog following him around that's part of his hallucination and he spends the whole movie saying stuff like "here, boy," or "good boy." Except that it's pretty obviously a female dog. It's not really a big deal, but how hard is it to change the script if the dog's female?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 01:17
|
|
|
Cowslips Warren posted:The daughter loving got me thinking. In Watchmen, when does the Comedian figure out he's Laurie' father? There's never any mention of the Hooded Justice being her mom's boyfriend, but Sally's manager does point out it isn't his kid. He probably knew as soon as Sally was pregnant - they had a consentual, sexual relationship at some point, despite the attempted rape. I got the impression that Sally made it painfully obvious that he was not to be a part of her life. In the comic, the text makes it pretty explicit when he says "Can't a guy talk to his...you know, his old friend's daughter?" that he ALMOST said "his daughter", but stopped himself, presumably not wanting Laurie to find out like that and also not wanting to make Sally any angrier than she already was. The pictures are supposed to signify that yes, he did care about both of them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 01:29
|
|
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:I thought his reaction was pretty appropriate. The reason he reacted the way he did was because Oedipus stabbing his eyes out for loving his mom = Oh Dae Su cutting his tongue out for loving his daughter. Note the similarity of the names.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 03:06
|
|
|
While the switch from the giant brain squid to a Dr. Manhattan-like energy weapon is probably a bit easier for the audience to swallow and still probably has the same thematic significance (I'm even willing to believe that the USA and USSA would wait long enough to analyze the explosions before launching nukes), everything involved in the creation of the weapon is easily presented as nonthreatening, so what did the Comedian discover that would freak him out so much?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 03:50
|
|
|
I don't know maybe the plan to murder millions of innocent civilians and then lie about it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 03:54
|
|
|
Travis343 posted:I don't know maybe the plan to murder millions of innocent civilians and then lie about it? There was no evidence of this anywhere. Ozymandias was the only one who knew of it. Rorschach and Dan didn't discover the plan, just that Ozymandias was involved in the Comedian's death, Rorschach's framing, and his own assassination attempt. Not even the scientists who built the machines seemed to think they'd be used to kill anyone. Dr Christmas has a new favorite as of 03:59 on Sep 24, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 03:54
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:Yeah, but there was no evidence of this anywhere. Ozymandias was the only one who knew of it. If this was true then why did Ozymandias have to kill the Comedian? I don't think they come right out and say exactly what the Comedian knows (in the film, anyway) but it's enough to blow the lid off of Veidt's plan, so logically there's at least a hint of what Veidt plans to do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 04:01
|
|
|
Travis343 posted:If this was true then why did Ozymandias have to kill the Comedian? I don't think they come right out and say exactly what the Comedian knows (in the film, anyway) but it's enough to blow the lid off of Veidt's plan, so logically there's at least a hint of what Veidt plans to do. I'm asking how he discovered the plan. In the book, the Comedian discovered the island with the brain squid broadcasting terrifying psychic messages. It was a tangible thing that he could find and be freaked out by without even knowing that it would be used to kill millions. In the movie, they still had the Comedian upset after discovering something disturbing, but they neglected to tell us what that disturbing thing was, as even the WMD itself was no more sinister than any other energy research.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 04:10
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:I'm asking how he discovered the plan. In the book, the Comedian discovered the island with the brain squid broadcasting terrifying psychic messages. It was a tangible thing that he could find and be freaked out by without even knowing that it would be used to kill millions. I just figured he got wind of the plan somehow. To be honest, I always got the feeling that The Comedian was meant to be one of the smarter characters, for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 04:24
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:I'm asking how he discovered the plan. In the book, the Comedian discovered the island with the brain squid broadcasting terrifying psychic messages. It was a tangible thing that he could find and be freaked out by without even knowing that it would be used to kill millions.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 04:32
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:While the switch from the giant brain squid to a Dr. Manhattan-like energy weapon is probably a bit easier for the audience to swallow and still probably has the same thematic significance (I'm even willing to believe that the USA and USSA would wait long enough to analyze the explosions before launching nukes), everything involved in the creation of the weapon is easily presented as nonthreatening, so what did the Comedian discover that would freak him out so much? My irrationally irritating moment is the switch from brain squid to WMDs. Ozy's plan doesn't work nearly as well with making the enemy Dr. Manhattan rather than an alien force, since Manhattan is basically a weapon of the US, and it would not be nearly as unreasonable to assume the US was responsible for the attacks compared to blaming them for a giant freakish brain alien out of nowhere. The change for the movie would have caused WWIII, not brought (temporary) World Peace, and Ozy would have known that 
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 04:49
|
|
|
Van Ishikawa posted:My irrationally irritating moment is the switch from brain squid to WMDs. Ozy's plan doesn't work nearly as well with making the enemy Dr. Manhattan rather than an alien force, since Manhattan is basically a weapon of the US, and it would not be nearly as unreasonable to assume the US was responsible for the attacks compared to blaming them for a giant freakish brain alien out of nowhere. The change for the movie would have caused WWIII, not brought (temporary) World Peace, and Ozy would have known that It baffled me that Snyder would take such care and effort to do the movie right and then so utterly screw up Ozymandias. Whatever the man's politics, they clearly influenced the adaptation. So while I don't think comic book Ozy would have done the WMDs, it really fits better with the film's terrible terrible portrayal of him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 05:24
|
|
|
While sitting through the nonsensical plot twists and general stupidity of The Box, the one thing that irritated me over all else was that everyone in Virginia spoke with a southern twang.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 05:25
|
|
|
It really bothers me that the stupid teenager survives in War of the Worlds. He acts like a dumb inconsiderate prick the whole movie and almost causes his sister to be taken away by the couple during the battle. We even get to see a huge wall of flame engulf the hillside where he was and somehow he still makes it to Boston. I guess it bothers me because in a movie where probably millions of people die, none of the major characters are affected at all. There's no loss or sacrifice or anything. A large chunk of the population of the WORLD get vaporized by ray guns and turned into red mist but it's still a happy ending because at least the family is together at the end. Yay  I don't even want to get into the absolutely retarded plan the Martians came up with to invade Earth. "Let's just bury these invincible killing machines and wait for millions of years to actually invade for some reason" Also, why do the tripod's shields stop working? I know the aliens were defeated by Bacteria from earth but why would that affect their shields? Were the shields powered by one of the aliens running on a hamster wheel or something?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 06:43
|
|
|
Van Ishikawa posted:My irrationally irritating moment is the switch from brain squid to WMDs. Ozy's plan doesn't work nearly as well with making the enemy Dr. Manhattan rather than an alien force, since Manhattan is basically a weapon of the US, and it would not be nearly as unreasonable to assume the US was responsible for the attacks compared to blaming them for a giant freakish brain alien out of nowhere. The change for the movie would have caused WWIII, not brought (temporary) World Peace, and Ozy would have known that The US would have blown up its own cities for what reason exactly? I thought the switch was a pretty decent one, all things considered. If anything it was actually better than a giant squid monster because given the tone of the rest of the novel it seems a bit silly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 07:34
|
|
|
The problem with the alien brain-squid (great though it is in the graphic novel) is that a) it relies on the existence of psychics, who are only really mentioned in the book in relation the squid b) these days people would say "Well, they could just test the DNA and find out that it's terrestrial in origin, and not alien at all" So I think some sort of change to the ending was inevitable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 07:47
|
|
|
Bonk posted:it was a Korean take on Greek tragedy, most notably Sophocles and specifically cribbing elements from Oedipus Rex. Exactly, but I didn't feel like they overdid his reaction to make it 'fit'. Adus posted:The US would have blown up its own cities for what reason exactly? Dr. Manhattan would never be seen as a common enemy regardless of the US being harmed by him as well. It would still just look like their own weapon backfiring on them. While the giant squid might've been considered 'silly' by audiences, it still does exactly what Ozy intended. There's a reason Moore chose to go for an inter-dimensional alien. Stoatbringer posted:The problem with the alien brain-squid (great though it is in the graphic novel) is that a) why couldn't the movie mention it as well? b) I'm pretty sure it's an inter-dimensional being. And even if it was deemed terrestrial, it would still work better than Dr. Manhattan because no one knows where it came from. Dr. Manhattan on the other hand was very much, and widely known to be, an american 'product'.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 08:16
|
|
|
I read the comic book and saw the movie for Watchmen, and I felt like the movie ending made more sense. In the comic Dr. Manhattan has almost no reason to be involved in the ending, he just shows up because the chick asked him to and then is like "whatever bro" when he finds Ozymandias's plan. The movie ending actually involves Dr. Manhattan, and honestly does an even better job of showing his disconnection from "normal" human emotions because he has every reason to be pissed about being used, and he simply isn't. In the comic book Dr. Manhattan could have stayed up in space and it wouldn't really have changed anything or meant anything different. Also, I mean come the gently caress on? A giant alien squid? THIS is what you come up with for your ending?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 08:53
|
|
|
I know I'm very late to this discussion, but I've watched all three Toy Story movies a bunch of times, and I never thought that Woody used to be the mother's toy. Was it ever mentioned or hinted at in the movie, or is it just a fan theory?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 09:01
|
|
|
Werner-Boogle posted:I know I'm very late to this discussion, but I've watched all three Toy Story movies a bunch of times, and I never thought that Woody used to be the mother's toy. Was it ever mentioned or hinted at in the movie, or is it just a fan theory? I haven't seen the third one yet, but the second movie makes it clear that Woody is an old toy. It's mentioned that his show was cancelled after Sputnik was launched in 1957. So by the time of Toy Story 2, Woody was at least 42 years old. So he must have had a previous owner.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 10:19
|
|
|
Falcon2001 posted:And Scott Pilgrim Vs The World has Coke Zero, which I didn't realize until way later. Along the lines of Cloverfield and the whole product placement, I can't loving stand Slusho. Yes, J.J. Abrams, Slusho. It was in Alias, it was in Cloverfield, it was even in goddamn Star Trek. We're very proud of your fake Icee company. I don't know why it irritates me so much... it's like if Joss Whedon decided to toss Blue Sun into everything he ever did: Buffy's wearing a Blue Sun t-shirt! All the people in "Dollhouse" eat Blue Sun tuna! Wolverine cracks open an ice-cold Blue Sun beer in the original script of "X-Men"!  It just comes off to me as trying too hard to do a "nudge nudge, wink wink" to his fans. I'm not even saying it as someone who dislikes J.J. Abrams; I mean, I didn't enjoy "LOST", but I liked "Star Trek" a lot, and "Fringe" is probably my favorite TV show on right now. I'm trying to catch up with it, since work prevents me from getting to watch it as it airs. Has Slusho showed up in "Fringe" yet?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 10:35
|
|
|
Mu Cow posted:I haven't seen the third one yet, but the second movie makes it clear that Woody is an old toy. It's mentioned that his show was cancelled after Sputnik was launched in 1957. So by the time of Toy Story 2, Woody was at least 42 years old. So he must have had a previous owner. I doubt it, Woody never knows about his old show and he has an extreme attachment to Andy. I think Woody was just tossed in storage some place for years until he got snapped up and given to Andy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 10:59
|
|
|
FrancisYorkPatty posted:I doubt it, Woody never knows about his old show and he has an extreme attachment to Andy. I think Woody was just tossed in storage some place for years until he got snapped up and given to Andy. Exactly, that's what I thought, which is why it confused me that everyone seemed to agree that Woody used to belong to Andy's mom.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 14:05
|
|
|
Nucular Carmul posted:I read the comic book and saw the movie for Watchmen, and I felt like the movie ending made more sense. In the comic Dr. Manhattan has almost no reason to be involved in the ending, he just shows up because the chick asked him to and then is like "whatever bro" when he finds Ozymandias's plan. The movie ending actually involves Dr. Manhattan, and honestly does an even better job of showing his disconnection from "normal" human emotions because he has every reason to be pissed about being used, and he simply isn't. In the comic book Dr. Manhattan could have stayed up in space and it wouldn't really have changed anything or meant anything different. Totally agree with this. Loved the comic book, but I thought the movie's ending made way more sense in the context of the story.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 14:36
|
|
|
Comedian found out about Ozymandias's plan and lost it because he knew it would work. It was the horrible poo poo he'd spent his entire life doing but one hundred times more violent and crazy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 14:46
|
|
|
Come on, the movie's ending doesn't make much sense to me. America's super weapon (A symbol for the country. His name is Dr Manhattan for god's sake) backfires on America, destroying two entire cities, while also destroying the Soviet capital. (if I remember the specifics correctly.) Why the hell would America's enemy be anything but extremely enraged at America for letting its 'weapon' get out of control? Dissapointed Owl has a new favorite as of 16:28 on Sep 24, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 15:52
|
|
|
I think his self-exile to Mars for however long it was before the "attack" casts a bit of doubt on his true loyalties. To the rest of the world, it looks like he abandoned America, and then attacked the earth - it wasn't just New York and Moscow that got totaled. I agree that the squid works better but I wouldn't say the movie makes "no sense at all".
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 16:03
|
|
|
Travis343 posted:I think his self-exile to Mars for however long it was before the "attack" casts a bit of doubt on his true loyalties. To the rest of the world, it looks like he abandoned America, and then attacked the earth - it wasn't just New York and Moscow that got totaled. Yeah, fixed the hyperbole.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 16:28
|
|
|
Away all Goats posted:I guess it bothers me because in a movie where probably millions of people die, none of the major characters are affected at all. There's no loss or sacrifice or anything. A large chunk of the population of the WORLD get vaporized by ray guns and turned into red mist but it's still a happy ending because at least the family is together at the end. Yay This was and continues to be a huge sticking point for a lot of people. It's definitely ridiculous and annoying. I think the opposing argument when the film came out was went something like "don't be so cynical" but I was a belligerent 15-year-old then so I'm probably not remembering it correctly. Essentially, though, you've hit the nail on the head for me. There's no real reason for him to survive except to provide a happy ending (doesn't he come stumbling down the middle of the street?). I guess you could argue that they were exceptionally lucky because they're the main characters (for the same reasons that the main character in Schindler's List isn't a Jew who dies in Auschwitz), but they're essentially observant bystanders through the entire film. Away all Goats posted:I don't even want to get into the absolutely retarded plan the Martians came up with to invade Earth. "Let's just bury these invincible killing machines and wait for millions of years to actually invade for some reason" This is a good (probable) example of something done not out of internal logic but because "it'd look cool". To be fair it does look cool, it looks totally sweet and when I saw this in the theater that first roar was a total "primal fear" experience, but it doesn't make sense, which is too bad. You'd think huge capsules crashing to earth would look cool enough, but I guess not. What's really frustrating, all in all, is that the film has some astounding, terrifying sequences and concepts but Spielberg was too afraid of alienating major audiences and so he pulled his punches. War Of The Worlds is basically a haunted house ride. Makes me appreciate Contagion all the more. edit: Wikipedia tells me that Spielberg's intention was to make a "horror movie for kids", which clears up some of the intent, I guess. Magic Hate Ball has a new favorite as of 17:20 on Sep 24, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 17:15
|
|
|
Thought of another one. "Aggressive" dogs in movies, especially in comedies. I've lived with or around dogs my entire life and can read their reactions pretty well (it's not hard). There is a huge difference between "I am agitated and am going to attack you" and "I want to roughhouse! Let's play!" Every movie I've seen involving a dog attack that doesn't involve CGI or other fakery is the latter. The dog is in a happy mood and in play mode, with the movie desperately trying to make the dog look vicious, usually with some kind of conspicuous breed. The most recent example I can think of is The Dark Knight, with several scenes involving happy rottweilers viciously playing with Batman. I can't really complain and I understand the reasons why you don't want a dog (or any animal really) in "aggressive" mode for a movie... for one it's one of those things that encourages animal cruelty in a way, but it's still something I notice. It also furthers what is probably an undeserved reputation for the animal, and Rottweilers and Dobermans in particular are maligned by it. They're excellent companions and family pets if raised right, but in movies you pretty much only see them as vicious guard dogs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 19:26
|
|
|
That's a good post, and like you said its a double-edged sword. Maybe angry dogs (in fact, any angry animal at all) should be the sole domain of CGI from now on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 09:39 |
|
|
ServoMST3K posted:Maybe angry dogs (in fact, any angry animal at all) should be the sole domain of CGI from now on. That's a terrible idea.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2011 20:03
|
|