Offside Chat Archives (2014-2021)

brightpilot6 said:Well, damn. There’s a certain kind of art in it, and you have to accept that some people actually find it good. I’ll say it again: if you could just grasp why someone finds this appealing, you might actually learn something about them.

For me, the real issue is how they’ve been leaning so heavily on legends like King Arthur or—as I see they're prepping it now—Robin Hood. It’s all these Matrix-style gothic hybrids mixed with steampunk action, wrapped in set pieces and special effects straight out of Lord of the Rings. To the newer generations, these flashy reimaginings will be their version of King Arthur or Robin Hood, replacing the old-school folk ballads we grew up listening to. But what can you really do? Every era has its own flavor.

I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again—the "Terror" series was honestly great just as it was. Then they went and added some random subplot about someone jumping around on a ship. I guess they only did it because they think that's what audiences are looking for these days.

Fewer and fewer people are actually showing up to theaters these days, so studios are just playing it safe by dumping all their cash into superhero blockbusters instead.
If we’re being totally honest here, most of us on this forum are probably just pirating movies online anyway, which means some genuinely high-quality films don't even come close to breaking even, and once they fail to turn a profit, the next creative project gets left out in the cold without any funding.
Sure, people watch superheroes at home too, but those franchises have a massive, built-in audience that stays loyal.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3682448/?ref_=nv_sr_1

This was honestly one of the last movies where I felt like it was actually worth the effort to go sit in a theater. Turns out Spielberg still has it. 😁

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3799694...=nm_flmg_act_7

Both this and Kingsman 2 actually managed to make me laugh.

I have a deep appreciation for sci-fi and fantasy.
What really grinds my gears is when studios try to act all high-brow and dump a massive budget into some mediocre romance, yet they fail to deliver a coherent plot. Honestly, if you’re going to insist on including a love interest, why not just buy the rights to something actually worthwhile and adapt that instead?
It seems like almost every great sci-fi or fantasy film is based on an excellent source material, while those attempting original stories are usually forgettable. Think about *The Odyssey*, *Dune*, *Blade Runner*, *The Lord of the Rings*, *Solaris*, or *Excalibur*.
I genuinely struggle to recall a single piece of original sci-fi that actually holds up. I’m sure they exist, but they aren't coming to mind right now.
Why not just acquire the rights to something like a Jack Vance novel, or perhaps works by Gene Wolfe? At least then we would be left with a damn decent story.

Speaking of which, I heard rumors there might be a chance at adapting Arthur C. Clarke’s series, Asimov’s *Foundation*, and a few other interesting titles that I can't quite name at the moment.

Jessica Gonzalez said:I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again—the "Terror" series was honestly great just as it was. Then they went and added some random subplot about someone jumping around on a ship. I guess they only did it because they think that's what audiences are looking for these days.

It's not even about that. It's because that thing is actually a mythological Inuit creature that's right there in the book the show is based on. Honestly, it's like asking why they put a Great White shark in a movie when the story was already a solid drama about a small coastal town without it.

Jason Fowler57 said:It's not even about that. It's because that thing is actually a mythological Inuit creature that's right there in the book the show is based on. Honestly, it's like asking why they put a Great White shark in a movie when the story was already a solid drama about a small coastal town without it.

I guess it doesn't change much; either way, both the book and the show are probably a bit silly.

Matthew Young35 said:I have a deep appreciation for sci-fi and fantasy.
What really grinds my gears is when studios try to act all high-brow and dump a massive budget into some mediocre romance, yet they fail to deliver a coherent plot. Honestly, if you’re going to insist on including a love interest, why not just buy the rights to something actually worthwhile and adapt that instead?
It seems like almost every great sci-fi or fantasy film is based on an excellent source material, while those attempting original stories are usually forgettable. Think about *The Odyssey*, *Dune*, *Blade Runner*, *The Lord of the Rings*, *Solaris*, or *Excalibur*.
I genuinely struggle to recall a single piece of original sci-fi that actually holds up. I’m sure they exist, but they aren't coming to mind right now.
Why not just acquire the rights to something like a Jack Vance novel, or perhaps works by Gene Wolfe? At least then we would be left with a damn decent story.

Speaking of which, I heard rumors there might be a chance at adapting Arthur C. Clarke’s series, Asimov’s *Foundation*, and a few other interesting titles that I can't quite name at the moment.

Blade Runner 2049, Arrival, Interstellar, Inception, Ex Machina, Annihilation, District 9, Gravity, Children of Men, Edge of Tomorrow, The Martian, Moon, Donnie Darko, Her, Minority Report (the last Spielberg one was decent enough for me)...

Just off the top of my head—and look, I wouldn't call all of these masterpieces, but most are at least solid. You seriously cannot tell me there hasn't been good sci-fi coming out of America over the last 15 years. If anything, I'd argue there's quite a lot of it, despite this massive superhero wave everyone loves to hate on. Case in point: Villeneuve will probably turn Dune into a multi-film epic.

I'll concede that overall movie quality in the States has dipped compared to the 90s and previous eras, but people really go overboard claiming there isn't any good cinema left.

Noah Roberts46 said:Blade Runner 2049, Arrival, Interstellar, Inception, Ex Machina, Annihilation, District 9, Gravity, Children of Men, Edge of Tomorrow, The Martian, Moon, Donnie Darko, Her, Minority Report (the last Spielberg one was decent enough for me)...

Just off the top of my head—and look, I wouldn't call all of these masterpieces, but most are at least solid. You seriously cannot tell me there hasn't been good sci-fi coming out of America over the last 15 years. If anything, I'd argue there's quite a lot of it, despite this massive superhero wave everyone loves to hate on. Case in point: Villeneuve will probably turn Dune into a multi-film epic.

I'll concede that overall movie quality in the States has dipped compared to the 90s and previous eras, but people really go overboard claiming there isn't any good cinema left.

Those two would’ve been great if they just cut the last half hour. 😬Both were excellent until they totally botched the endings.

The ideas don't even bother me that much. It's just that it happens so often—someone takes a brilliant idea and messes it up. Or they buy a great story and then just ruin it.

Look at those recent video game adaptations, like Assassin's Creed or WoW. Those games have such interesting stories to pull from. But somehow, they managed to take a finished narrative and turn it into... well, something pretty mediocre.
They're planning a Witcher project too. I just hope they don't screw that one up just as badly.

We seriously need to get moving on legalizing marijuana already. It feels like we’re going to be the very last ones to board the train instead of actually leading the pack this season.
Not to mention how much easier life would be for people dealing with those brutal chronic illnesses where the relaxing effects of weed could actually make a difference.

I mean, look at how Lidl in Switzerland started selling low-THC strains, and you can see exactly where this is headed. Give it five years max, and we'll be looking at full-blown, classic legalization.
Around here, this is going to be the absolute hottest topic during the 2025 presidential campaign. Honestly, I don't even know what to say about it. 😁

brightpilot6 said:It’s been years since Hitchcock produced anything truly worth watching.

🤣

James Anderson5 said:🤣

And honestly, everyone completely missed the call to head out to the Catskills on the previous page, too. 😁

Has anyone else here actually sat down and watched The Tree of Life? If you have, I’m dying to know what you thought about it... For me, it’s honestly one of those rare films that sits right at the very top of my all-time favorites list.

Noah Roberts46 said:Blade Runner 2049, Arrival, Interstellar, Inception, Ex Machina, Annihilation, District 9, Gravity, Children of Men, Edge of Tomorrow, The Martian, Moon, Donnie Darko, Her, Minority Report (the last Spielberg one was decent enough for me)...

Just off the top of my head—and look, I wouldn't call all of these masterpieces, but most are at least solid. You seriously cannot tell me there hasn't been good sci-fi coming out of America over the last 15 years. If anything, I'd argue there's quite a lot of it, despite this massive superhero wave everyone loves to hate on. Case in point: Villeneuve will probably turn Dune into a multi-film epic.

I'll concede that overall movie quality in the States has dipped compared to the 90s and previous eras, but people really go overboard claiming there isn't any good cinema left.

None of those listed qualify as "smart" sci-fi; they pale in comparison to the classics Matthew Young35 mentioned. Furthermore, claiming there is no good sci-fi left just because you think Spielberg's last decent outing was Minority Report is laughable. To then suggest pseudo-scientific flicks like Inception, Interstellar, or Donnie Darko as alternatives? Now you're adding Edge of Tomorrow to the list too. 🤣

Matthew Young35, what is your take on Soviet sci-fi?
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091341/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091759/

And one forgotten gem: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089869/

Hand me those two before any of the titles you listed, you pretentious snob.

That is precisely the issue: all the titles mentioned above are populist sci-fi designed for weekend casuals. It is like reading a trashy pulp novelist while dragging Clarke, Asimov, and Heinlein through the mud. There is zero cinematic culture here, much like the state of modern literature. Everything has been inverted. Today, we listen to the moral lectures of celebrity reality stars. Modern sci-fi follows that exact same pattern. It isn't an issue if a film is populist—even the Odyssey was quite successful for its time, yet it possessed genuine substance. These modern productions lack that fundamental integrity.

The state of cinema today is pathetic. Sure, legends like Steven Spielberg can still churn out a solid flick, but excellence isn't just about avoiding failure. Take *Lincoln*; by any objective standard, it’s a fine piece of filmmaking, but I gain absolutely nothing from watching it. Movies used to possess the power to stir the soul, fueled by actors who actually understood their craft. Now? You watch DiCaprio and all you see is that same tired, exaggerated scowl that becomes an eyesore after ten minutes. We simply don't have those cinematic faces or that caliber of talent anymore. They are extinct.

Exactly. Look at the 1970s—every single year was stacked with masterpieces. You had *The Godfather Part II* and *Chinatown* dropping in the same window. That kind of density is unthinkable today. I’m not delusional enough to demand that level of perfection from modern studios, but they can't even attempt to approach it. Those kinds of movies are gone.

It’s not that there aren't "good" movies being made; you can find decent ones every year. But for me, they are merely competent. They are good, not great. Give me something that leaves a lasting impression, something that actually blows my mind.

The horror genre is suffering from the same rot. I’m not even a die-hard horror fan, but you don't need to be one to see how abysmal the quality has become. Every once in a while, a decent film slips through the cracks, but most of it is just "meta-horror." I am sick to death of these self-aware, clever little commentaries. Oh, look at me, I’m making a meta-horror like *The Cabin in the Woods*, *It Follows*, *The Babadook*, or *Get Out*. Fine, they're okay, but give me some actual substance! Sometimes I just want an old-school horror movie without all the pretentious meta-nonsense.

That’s why we have *The Thing*. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0084787/ Kurt Russell takes down a creature while testing the loyalty of his crew in Antarctica. That is what I’m talking about. Kurt Russell is a total powerhouse.

fadedhound86 said:Has anyone else here actually sat down and watched The Tree of Life? If you have, I’m dying to know what you thought about it... For me, it’s honestly one of those rare films that sits right at the very top of my all-time favorites list.

Man, I’d have shut that thing off after 11 minutes and 47 seconds.

I barely sat through *The Tree of Life*, and that *Knight of Cups* mess was just pretentious philosophizing wrapped in pretty shots and music—that’s the only reason I didn't walk out. Terrence Malick has made three good to great films; everything else is garbage. Call me a snob if you want. ☕

@Remam
You claim things are repetitive, then complain about how DiCaprio is scowling the whole time and lacks his old charisma. You've basically said the same thing a hundred times already. What an idiot. 🙏

The funny thing is, I actually agree with you, but then you turn around and call someone else out for repeating things that have been stated a hundred times? You're digging your own grave here.

You aren't a horror fan. 🤣

Give it a rest. Stop embarrassing yourself with this fake persona and the trolling, and just write like a normal person.

Noah Roberts46 said:Blade Runner 2049, Arrival, Interstellar, Inception, Ex Machina, Annihilation, District 9, Gravity, Children of Men, Edge of Tomorrow, The Martian, Moon, Donnie Darko, Her, Minority Report (the last Spielberg one was decent enough for me)...

Just off the top of my head—and look, I wouldn't call all of these masterpieces, but most are at least solid. You seriously cannot tell me there hasn't been good sci-fi coming out of America over the last 15 years. If anything, I'd argue there's quite a lot of it, despite this massive superhero wave everyone loves to hate on. Case in point: Villeneuve will probably turn Dune into a multi-film epic.

I'll concede that overall movie quality in the States has dipped compared to the 90s and previous eras, but people really go overboard claiming there isn't any good cinema left.

Man, honestly? None of those listed come close to being on the same level as the ones I mentioned, maybe with the exception of District 9.
Blade Runner 2049 is visually stunning, sure, but it’s an empty shell of a movie that just exploits the original.
Arrival starts with a relatively strong concept, but halfway through, they seemingly lose the plot on how to actually develop that idea or deliver a meaningful resolution.
Interstellar is decent for the first half, but after that... Honestly, it would have been better if they just stopped midway and left the ending to our imagination.
Ex Machina is fine, I guess, but it’s kind of forgettable. You watch it thinking it’s some profound piece of work, then a month later, you can barely remember what it was about beyond some robots.
Gravity is another visual triumph, yet it’s packed with stupidity and lacks any real substance.
Edge of Tomorrow is just a standard action flick.
The Martian is tolerable, but painfully naive. I don't even need to explain why the idea of a guy living in a tent on Mars without any real logistics, growing peas (!) is ridiculous.
Moon feels more like metaphysical rambling than actual sci-fi.
As for Minority Report, it’s about as much "sci-fi" as Star Wars or Mission Impossible.

I haven't seen the others.

Most of those films are simplistic and lack true science fiction depth.
On top of that, the concepts are often terrible.
Take Interstellar, for example. The core premise is idiotic.

To be blunt, truly great sci-fi is non-existent outside of the five or six I already named—and even those were based on books or written in collaboration with actual sci-fi authors.
We're talking real sci-fi, not just action movies. Terminator isn't even really a sci-fi film.

Hollywood cares more about throwing $30 million at a CGI circle than giving someone like Neil Gaiman $50,000 to write a script.

Oh, I just remembered a rumor I heard. Apparently, there's talk of a series adaptation of Zelazny's Chronicles of Amber.

Ryan Hall4 said:None of those listed qualify as "smart" sci-fi; they pale in comparison to the classics Matthew Young35 mentioned. Furthermore, claiming there is no good sci-fi left just because you think Spielberg's last decent outing was Minority Report is laughable. To then suggest pseudo-scientific flicks like Inception, Interstellar, or Donnie Darko as alternatives? Now you're adding Edge of Tomorrow to the list too. 🤣

Matthew Young35, what is your take on Soviet sci-fi?
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091341/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091759/

And one forgotten gem: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089869/

Hand me those two before any of the titles you listed, you pretentious snob.

That is precisely the issue: all the titles mentioned above are populist sci-fi designed for weekend casuals. It is like reading a trashy pulp novelist while dragging Clarke, Asimov, and Heinlein through the mud. There is zero cinematic culture here, much like the state of modern literature. Everything has been inverted. Today, we listen to the moral lectures of celebrity reality stars. Modern sci-fi follows that exact same pattern. It isn't an issue if a film is populist—even the Odyssey was quite successful for its time, yet it possessed genuine substance. These modern productions lack that fundamental integrity.

I’ve never been able to connect with Russian literature. Not even on paper, if I’m being honest. I haven't spent much time wading through their classics, but the disconnect is definitely there.
I think I’ve only really watched *Stalker*.

When we talk about screen adaptations of sci-fi or fantasy series, things actually look a bit brighter. There’s a decent pool of interesting, high-quality shows out there. Beyond the usual heavy hitters like Game of Thrones, you have solid options like The Expanse, American Gods, Childhood's End, or Dune. There’s plenty more where that came from.
But let's be honest: even those are all based on literary works.

Heading to see Avengers tonight. Honestly? It’s all just massive marketing hype at this point—nothing but mindless blockbusters.

It comes down to memory. Take *Ex Machina*, for example. I remember thinking it was solid, but if you asked me to recap the plot right now, I’d have no clue who did what to whom. That's the problem with cinema. Most modern films just evaporate. You might walk out of a theater feeling absolutely thrilled, but give it a month and it’s gone—it never truly stuck.

Regarding sci-fi or fantasy series: I’m a fan of *Farscape*. Has anyone here seen it? Most people bail after the first few episodes, but that show is absolute perfection once the seasons start progressing. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0187636/

*Stargate* was decent, though it dragged on far too long. *Battlestar Galactica* was excellent, even if certain storylines started grating on my nerves toward the end. *The X-Files* is damn good, though calling it pure sci-fi is a stretch since it jumps genres constantly. Finally, *Babylon 5* is somewhat overlooked, but it's top-tier.