Movie Thread

[Legend]

I watched the movie Hoppers.

Something that I've been thinking about, is that it's often hard to really understand why something works/doesn't work.

Most movies/shows aren't perfectly realistic. Lawyers complain about lawyer shows bring unrealistic. Physicists complain about physics in sci-fi movies. Etc.

Inaccuracies can affect an individual's enjoyment, but these are generally domain specific. They don't generally matter.

Plot holes can be problematic. But they usually don't matter. 


I think something that matters to me is internal consistency.

Either on the scene level or the overall story. Does it make sense to go from scene A to scene B? Is scene A consistent?  Etc. But I don't think it matters as much if there are small inconsistencies between scenes. You're not going to notice if the character is suddenly wearing a slightly different color blue shirt.


I think the movie Cars has an internal consistency. But I think if you tried to justify the world by giving an explanation for why they are living cars, I think the explanation would be absurd and stop being consistent. 

I am going on this rant because there are points in Hoppers where it feels like it's not logically consistent.

There are like two big jumps in the story that feel kind of silly. I think it drags the movie down a bit for me, even though it's largely a good movie.

Verisimilitude.

Only learned that word recently. And I agree 10,000%

Gravity sucked because they did not understand space, but they at least understood their movie version of space.

[the-pi-guy]

Apparently Criterion is releasing a complete set of Stanley Kubrick's work.

This will probably be like $500.  

[Legend]

Apparently Criterion is releasing a complete set of Stanley Kubrick's work.

This will probably be like $500. 

I'll save money and just buy 2001 on its own 

[Legend]

So supergirl seems to suck, shocker.

I know it's a hot and bold take, but I don't think James Gunn has done the best for DC.

[the-pi-guy]

I know it's a hot and bold take, but I don't think James Gunn has done the best for DC.

Has anyone?

[the-pi-guy]

I'll save money and just buy 2001 on its own 

$600, and on sale for $480. 







Criterion:




WB:




Criterion:





WB:






It'll probably go down to like $300 on sale, for 13 movies. 

[Legend]

Car window I can really see the difference, otherwise just looks like color grading to me.

Has anyone?

Zach Snyder 

Wonder Woman, Suicide Squad, the Supermans, Auquaman were all pretty successful. DC would love to go back to that.

[kitler53]

Has anyone?

christopher nolan did a wonderful job with batman. 

[kitler53]

random thought i guess but i'd love to see batman get a "into the spiderverse" style make over.    not like adopt the exact art style or anything but a set of animated movies instead of live action.  

[the-pi-guy]

Car window I can really see the difference, otherwise just looks like color grading to me.
Zach Snyder 

Wonder Woman, Suicide Squad, the Supermans, Auquaman were all pretty successful. DC would love to go back to that.

I feel like Zach Snyder is a large chunk of the reason why DC isn't doing very well right now. 

It had some huge early successes, but most of the movies didn't do well. (And frankly, some of the successes are probably because Nolan made awesome movies and people wanted more.)

Superman and Peacemaker are great under Gunn. Supergirl is the first disappointment. 

[the-pi-guy]

random thought i guess but i'd love to see batman get a "into the spiderverse" style make over.    not like adopt the exact art style or anything but a set of animated movies instead of live action. 

Technically DC has pumped out a lot of animated Batman movies. They just are more TV movie, as opposed to big animated releases like Into The Spider verse. 

[Legend]

I feel like Zach Snyder is a large chunk of the reason why DC isn't doing very well right now.

It had some huge early successes, but most of the movies didn't do well. (And frankly, some of the successes are probably because Nolan made awesome movies and people wanted more.)

Superman and Peacemaker are great under Gunn. Supergirl is the first disappointment.

I think it's fair to call superman a disappointment. A moderate success, but still a disappointment. But time will tell!

Personally I just can't tell what my thoughts are about Gunn. Not that negative but not that positive either.

random thought i guess but i'd love to see batman get a "into the spiderverse" style make over.    not like adopt the exact art style or anything but a set of animated movies instead of live action. 

i hate the idea on paper but maybe I'd love it in action

[kitler53]

I feel like Zach Snyder is a large chunk of the reason why DC isn't doing very well right now.

It had some huge early successes, but most of the movies didn't do well. (And frankly, some of the successes are probably because Nolan made awesome movies and people wanted more.)

Superman and Peacemaker are great under Gunn. Supergirl is the first disappointment.

snyder was responsible for these atrocities...





i feel like he really damaged the brand because this was even worse than...

[kitler53]

man.  dc has had a lot of low points...

[kitler53]

Technically DC has pumped out a lot of animated Batman movies. They just are more TV movie, as opposed to big animated releases like Into The Spider verse. 

really?  where would i even watch it?   i guess i'd just want something big enough to put into a theatre.   i'm not exactly sure what the right art style and story is but sony really nailed it with spiderman.  batman is the 2nd best super hero and i'd love to see it do something great.

i hate the idea on paper but maybe I'd love it in action

without a doubt it could be terrible too.  see my screenshot from above.   christopher nolan made such great films because he wrote great movies that respected the franchise.   snyder disrespected the franchise to make a movies that more represent him than batman.  

and no one wants an origin story anymore.   it has to be something better than that.