EPTBut yeah, on the other hand, Marvel has completely failed to make new stars out of the entireity of phase 5. So maybe thats more of a reason to set up the carbon copies.
Movie Discussion! - Page last
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
Please title all your posts and rehost all images on Imgur | ||
|
lestye
United States4269 Posts
But yeah, on the other hand, Marvel has completely failed to make new stars out of the entireity of phase 5. So maybe thats more of a reason to set up the carbon copies. | ||
|
ETisME
12900 Posts
8/10 Big Nolan fan here, but I didn't LOVE it. The original work, like many Greek mythology, is about God, human, fate and choices. Nolan intentionally downplays the mythology to bring out his message and modernise it a little. It was delivered quite well, especially at a time when the world has grown more chaotic and less kind. The controversial cast picks and the backlash make his message even more relevant. But in some ways, it can be interpreted entirely different, which I will get to at the spoiler section. Onto non-spoiler review: You know sometimes you watched a movie in the TV, and you kinda wonder what it was like for the audience back then. For me it was Ben-Hur. The Odyssey is probably one of those movies when our children/grand children watch it on whatever format available. Watching the entire movie shot in IMAX film, is such an interesting experience. There's a bit of vignetting at the corners. Some scenes look like they belonged to a different era of movie, especially the scene where the Trojans pulling the horse in, it looked like a 1950s movie with that sort of colour/contrast. However, at times, the look can be so different to the point that it lacks a good consistency. Some of the big negatives really stood out to me. 1. The storyboard 2. The cast 3. The scale To me, how Nolan is able to break apart a movie narrative structure and then pierce them together back is his best point. And this is his weaker one, in fact some scenes felt like it was awkwardly cut in, and only brought back hours later, without a huge significance. The characters are also quite a lot more one dimensional, and I didn't love what he did with Odysseus, who is supposed to be wiser/strategist than a warrior. Tom Holland, Zendaya and the punisher Jon all back on the big screen together so soon, really took me out. What's worse is, all three of them in many ways, are not so different than their characters in spiderman. What let me down the most is the scale. What's meant to tens of ships become just 3 at most. Nolan definitely didn't learn his lesson from Dunkirk. The problem with him unwilling to use more CGI, makes the entire journey felt like a rogue battle unit travelling along. Nolan, intentionally or not, with this scaled down version of odyssey, makes the mythology smaller as well. You have one cyclops instead of multiples, the giant soldiers would have been way more frightening etc. However, with all that being said, the movie is great. There're top quality elements everywhere, quite well pieced together. Nolan's message is that with the broken moral code, the basic trust between men, the world starts to crumble down. I think it's relatively well delivered, but the problem is (spoiler ahead) - + Show Spoiler + With Odysseus return, he killed the suitors within his house by lying/tricking them. Obviously, Nolan wanted to present Odysseus killing as justified, but isn't this just another act of defying trust? If you look at it from another angle, the suitors of Penelope could represent immigrants who abuse the law and moral code of the locals. Not unlike how the large influx of Muslims are demanding change in law in other countries. Surely Nolan isn't implying they need to be cleansed. I think that's where the movie fell short, because it is extremely difficult to adapt such an epic tale and not losing a lot of what made it great. In terms of adapting mythologies in the big screen, I still think the northman has done a far better job. It's brutal, the visual is stunning, the horror and the blur between reality and visions are great. | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1846 Posts
Nolan, if anything whitewashed and displayed Odysseus as way less brutal and much more moral then he was in the epic, he doesn't just murder the suitors, he also kills all the slave girls who slept with them, again, quite brutally. | ||
|
kakaru42
16 Posts
The Magic Faraway Tree: Colorful family movie with lots of movie magic. It has a good bit of jokes for adults and kids. Apparently there’s no plastic in the movie which juxtaposes the heavy CGI, ultimately giving a warm farmhouse vibe coupled with a playful dreamscape in fantasy imagination. Deathstalker: I feel like this is a fun mythic tale plucked from the pages of a Dungeons & Dragons campaign. The actors deliver funny performances and the corny lines complement the practical Jim Hensian effects. It has funny characters, cool action scenes, great costume design, and a killer metal soundtrack. Gave me Conan The Barbarian meets Willow vibes. | ||
|
ETisME
12900 Posts
On September 05 2026 03:56 Jankisa wrote: Trying to insert your anti-immigrant hate into a movie that has absolutely nothing to do with it is quite something. Nolan, if anything whitewashed and displayed Odysseus as way less brutal and much more moral then he was in the epic, he doesn't just murder the suitors, he also kills all the slave girls who slept with them, again, quite brutally. I think you completely misunderstood my point. I am not writing about my stance on immigration. I am writing about how it could be interpreted, as in it wasn't presented well. The entire trip he took, was his guilt for betraying something so socially important, i.e. gods rule / people trust in it. Now either you think his takeaway was that the rules dont actually mattered and that he needs to move on, or he has repented. If you were the camp on the latter, you would have seen his killing for those men yet another breaking of God's rule, that you need to treat your guest right. If you are the former, then it seems my viewpoint about him kicking out those who abuses rules is justified and that the journey was just him coming to accept this is ok to do. | ||
|
ETisME
12900 Posts
9/10 My movie of the year so far, what a fun watch. There are some controversy about not having Leon or Ada etc. but come on, even the older titles they were horrible in them. Zach Cregger is a great director. Just like his previous movie, Weapon, Resident evil is a mix of comedy and horror, the two mixes very well. And it's done even better here. If you played the OG resident evil games, it captures that feeling very well. "Oh you don't want to go in there, ah shit" or "ewww" you know, those are the moments that reminds you, horror isn't always pure horror, it creates a lot of tense moments and make us cope with it through laughing sometimes. The characters are very likeable, you don't really know how long they would stick around for but they all have great charm. Story itself is lacking, but serviceable. there are quite a few Easter eggs tied back to the game. Pov shots were very videogame like, the field of vision is never very far, it's as far as the flash light will go. the way objects slowly reveal itself in the light felt very videogame like. Monster design was done very well too. I might actually get the physical disc when it comes out! | ||
|
Yurie
12176 Posts
Watched it in a full cinema and most people seemed to like it there as well. Heard somebody ask about how it related to the games and as far as I know it mostly doesn't (apart from the setting). Which is a good thing, allows them to make a focused experience without having to hit certain story beats. I like that it was a normal length movie with a focused timeline. A bit corny and game centric in a few spots but it is a game franchise so it is to be expected. Overall had a good mix of comedic horror and action horror. The MC isn't exactly a super soldier and that is probably why the journey overall goes well. Hiding and being lucky are important skills. | ||
|
kakaru42
16 Posts
It embraces the video game feeling with the loot, ammo, padlocks, first-person pov, and voice memos, and how the protagonist talks to himself/audience. Yet the fuck, um, dude, fuck, protagonist, um, *scream*, shit, wtf, dude, talks to himself the entire film was annoying to me. He's just bumbling about to himself the entire film about basically everything. This choice struggled to give me a consistent visual and auditory experience of horror that insisted "comedy" and dialogue that ultimately prevented the film to give me emotion through the runtime. I felt like the scary parts were almost entirely conveyed through jump-scares, which I didn't like. And I didn't like the motivation of the character, who increasingly tripped over his self-proclaimed "glorified postmates" job, in deadly circumstances, while his personal motivations were neglected to forward the plot. The end result unfortunately was just too cheesy for me. Buddy: I thought this film nailed millennial nostalgia of Barney, Peewee, Zoom, etc. while coupling it with gruesome violence, surreal settings, and slasher horror themes. I thought the child actors were relatively good. The idea that the reality for the actors in those shows and what their lives are in that box that they cannot escape, is an interesting exposition into a horrifying sub-reality. Pretty good movies coming out in these genres but alas I'm getting a little tired of horror-comedy... | ||
|
kakaru42
16 Posts
| ||
|
lestye
United States4269 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17992 Posts
On October 17 2026 18:59 lestye wrote: I really need to see "You can see Everything this weekend". I'm obsessed with the trailers and the premise. I saw it in New York and the mostly Jewish crowd gobbled it up. I saw it again today in Toronto in a packed theatre in a non-jewish neighbourhood and the audience loved it. https://tl.net/forum/general/532255-us-politics-mega-thread?page=5982#119626 It is great to see Nathan Fielder at the height of his powers. I've been watching him since he was a regular on CBCs " this hour has 22 minutes" If I'm in the kind of legal trouble Elizabeth Holmes is in the last guy I want making a documentary about me is Nathan fielder. I would say that the 2003 movie monster did a better job of making aileen warnous look like a sympathetic figure than Nathan fielder's documentary did for Elizabeth Holmes. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17992 Posts
On July 28 2026 00:10 Jankisa wrote: It's breathtaking how little you actually know about things you like to talk about: And another one: This is from 2024 and it's not taking into consideration all the money they make from people subscribing to Disney + so they can watch things like Mandalorian or Andor. Not being able to understand that stock price doesn't necessarily correlate with a company doing well is very weird for someone who likes to post about money and economy a lot. Breath taking ignorance. nah. what evidence do we have that disney has been floundering the past 5 years? The evidence that The Walt Disney Company (DIS) has struggled over the past five years spans catastrophic stock performance, severe leadership dysfunction, massive streaming deficits, and a rapidly eroding traditional cable model. While the company has shown signs of a financial stabilization effort heading into 2026, the tangible proof of its recent struggles remains clear across multiple fronts. 1. Significant Destruction of Shareholder Value The most direct metric of Disney's struggles is its stock performance. Disney shares are trading significantly lower than their 2021 highs, with the stock declining over 34% in value over the past five years. In contrast, the broader S&P 500 has surged heavily during this exact same timeframe, highlighting how severely Disney has underperformed the market. The claim that Star Wars has generated massive revenue while yielding relatively low net profit (or failing to cover its massive acquisition and expansion costs) is rooted in financial analyses of Disney's era, studio accounting structures, and heavy overhead costs. Key Evidence and Arguments • The $4 Billion Lucasfilm Purchase vs. Box Office Return: • Disney bought Lucasfilm in 2012 for $4.05 billion. • Financial analyses (including breakdowns of U.K.-filed corporate production statements reported by outlets like Forbes) indicate that the theatrical box office profits of Disney's Star Wars film slate have struggled to recoup that initial purchase price. • The Theatrical Split and Marketing Costs: • While films like Star Wars: The Force Awakens grossed over $2 billion globally, raw box office revenue is split roughly 50/50 with movie theaters. • Massive production budgets (frequently exceeding $300M+ per film) combined with heavy global marketing campaigns (often averaging $100M–$200M per movie) drastically reduce net theatrical profit. • Underperforming or Flop Projects: • Certain entries like Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) lost over $100 million (and significantly more once marketing is factored in). • Other films like Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2019) had ballooned production and re-shoot costs that severely trimmed down net returns relative to their billion-dollar gross. • High-Cost Streaming and Park Investments: • Disney has spent billions producing high-budget Disney+ television series (such as The Acolyte, Ahsoka, and The Book of Boba Fett), alongside massive physical investments like theme park lands (Galaxy's Edge) and the short-lived, high-overhead Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser hotel (reportedly a $600 million investment). Critics argue these capital expenditures soak up a vast share of the revenue. • Revenue vs. Profit Discrepancies: • Disney has cited cumulative figures like $12 billion in revenue since 2012, critics and financial analysts point out that "revenue" mixes actual cash, expected future streams, and gross tallies without netting out the compounding costs of running a mega-franchise. (Note: This narrow profit margin argument primarily applies to Disney's corporate era post-2012; George Lucas’s original 1977 film and the original/prequel trilogies generated historic profit-to-cost ratios for their respective times we can dig into all the details if you like. claiming i am ignorant .. is ignorant. i have good reasons for my perspective and some of them are in this post. so you might claim i am wrong. claiming i am ignorant is off-base or just ignorant. I could talk about your use of the word "breathtaking", but i don't want to get Elaine Marie Bennis involved in this thread any more than i already have. | ||
|
lestye
United States4269 Posts
On October 18 2026 06:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I saw it in New York and the mostly Jewish crowd gobbled it up. I saw it again today in Toronto in a packed theatre in a non-jewish neighbourhood and the audience loved it. https://tl.net/forum/general/532255-us-politics-mega-thread?page=5982#119626 It is great to see Nathan Fielder at the height of his powers. I've been watching him since he was a regular on CBCs " this hour has 22 minutes" If I'm in the kind of legal trouble Elizabeth Holmes is in the last guy I want making a documentary about me is Nathan fielder. I would say that the 2003 movie monster did a better job of making aileen warnous look like a sympathetic figure than Nathan fielder's documentary did for Elizabeth Holmes. Oh damn. You watched a 3 hour movie twice? I rarely have the patience for that, especially if its in the same year or month between viewings. To answer your other question, isnt Disney floundering stock wise? The value hasn't gone up. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17992 Posts
As a Nathan Fielder fan ... I deny nothing. And please remember: 6 million jews died. it is never too early to educate the youngsters about the holocaust https://summiticeapparel.com/products/deny-nothing-baby-onesie Summit Ice believes that brand loyalty and Holocaust education should begin as early as possible. That’s why we’ve designed a baby onesie that is both cute and stylish. These little suckers are 100% cotton and feature snap closures for easy diaper changes. Here is how he got his start... and here OK, enough joking around. Let's get serious. What was the worst ass-kicking you got as a teenager? I got this talk when I was 19 from my Applied Combinatorics Professor. He was not happy with me. | ||
|
kakaru42
16 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17992 Posts
On October 19 2026 18:21 kakaru42 wrote: I think You Can See Everything is really well done. Beyond the documentary angle, it’s a compelling thriller noir, that’s well told and beautifully shot. The whole things is pretty spectacular imo. Nathan Fielder is a genius. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17992 Posts
#1. Jackie Brown (1997) ... shame to see Pam Grier become a psycho weirdo. Great Actress though. #2. Man On The Moon ( 1999 ) ... interesting to see Jim Carrey's "evolution" these past 15 years or so. #3. Monster ( 2004 ) - "you girls... you know women... i love 'em AND I HATE 'EM.. i love 'em AND I HATE 'EM", Richard Mallory #4. Camille Claudel ( 1988 ) - Isabelle Adjani has to be the most beautiful woman God ever created. "i burned the cheque; you can destroy it, but you can not stop me from making another one" "J'ai brûlé le chèque. Personne ne peut m'empêcher d'en faire un autre ! Personne ne peut m'empêcher d'en faire un autre !" #5. You Can See Everything ( 2026 ) #6. Batman Begins ( 2005 ) : " it is not who you are underneath... it is what you do that defines you", and she drops Bruce Wayne like a bad habit. #7. Bad News Bears Breaking Training (1978?) - the confrontations between Kelly Leake and his estranged father are epic. "you can't do that to me... no one does that to me ... i don't need you... i don't need any of you! ! !" For reference the #1 scene in my favourite novel of all time "You’ll get everything society can give a man. You’ll keep all the money. You’ll take any fame or honor anyone might want to grant. You’ll accept such gratitude as the tenants might feel. And I—I’ll take what nobody can give a man, except himself. I will have built Cortlandt." Claudel and Roark want to burn it all down. | ||
|
lestye
United States4269 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17992 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Evans and Holmes are both each others' "ride or die". They are 2 pretty despicable people who have a pure love for one another. Their relationship is weird in how they martial out responsibilities. However, every mutual "ride or die" marriage relationship is weird in that way as well. Every "ride or die" marriage relationship can look weird from the outside as you pick it apart, shred it, put it back together and re-analyze it. I found their love for each other is heartwarming... as despicable as they both were. I think they both want to be good parents to their children. The way Holmes constantly threw the kids up as meatshields on the big screen was despicable. Fortunately, they are so young it won't impact them long term. Holmes and Evans keep any and all chemistry and medical laboratory people away from them as far as possible. This allows them to claim that Theranos 2.0 will be viable. They can put on a big show viewing diagrams and using a few big words like apoptosis as they pretend to be assembling the new machine that will kick off Theranos 2.0. Elizabeth Holmes is the prototypical "crazy science girl". She does not care about money the way she cares about status, prestige and being viewed as a great genius. I've dealt directly with "crazy science girls" before and they are not materialistic. They do lie though... lots. Usually they are of above average intelligence and yearn to be viewed as mega geniuses. Sometimes real genuine Megagenius women can even get caught up in the "crazy science girl" thing. Ayn Rand was a literary genius and demanded she be viewed as a genius at all times. In her 50s and 60s you practically had to salute every time she entered a room. I'd put Ayn Rand in the "crazy science girl" category. The difference is Elizabeth Holmes is a criminal and Ayn Rand was a degenerate. Also Miss Rand didn't really go off the rails until she was in her 50s... Elizabeth Holmes was bonkers from the time she was 19. Both lied like rugs. I love the movie and I also love taking in the audience reactions to the movie. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17992 Posts
She took her dad's retirement money..lol. @32:02 that Lou Gehrig quote gets me right in the feels. @36:10 "standing on the shoulders of giants". | ||
| ||
