Posts by Henry Anderson47

Not quite.

We'll be fine.

I mean, we've already become legends anyway.😛

I was actually voting for that last one, just so you guys don't end up fighting over whose single vote it was. hi hi hi

A total legend and a complete force of nature... maybe the greatest.

He totally won me over with On the Waterfront.... I mean, most of his films toward the end of his career were pretty much garbage, but honestly, that doesn't even matter.

🙏

It was just bad. I knew right away something was off when he sat there in the car for so long without moving a muscle. 😢

He was just getting into his rhythm too....

And Gene... I mean, wasn't he in the top tier of drivers last season or maybe the one before that?

Yeah, true. Then the people who already can't stand blockbusters and Americans would just go after him even harder, and the ones who actually appreciate him now—not counting the general audience—would probably just toss him into the "trash" pile.

So, I guess it's better this way. 🙂

Man, honestly... who can ever actually please everyone? 😉

swiftcobra15 said:She basically accepts that she can't prove her experience, and by the strict rules of hard science, "it didn't happen," yet she’s still certain that it actually did. I guess she realized where science hits a wall, but she didn't let that kill her confidence or her optimism. She believes—not necessarily in God, but in herself, in what humans can do, and in other intelligent life out there.
It feels like the difference between being religious in a traditional sense and just having spirituality as a core part of being human. 🙂

👍
That was honestly my favorite part of the movie. He had to include that little touch of theism, otherwise, it would have just been another surface-level blockbuster without any real substance. I mean, realistically, anyone would feel that way regardless of their actual beliefs.
We'd all just be left with a million questions and fears and... whatever else.
🙂

I think you might be oversimplifying things there, Richard Howard2. It’s not always just about the budget, either. Sometimes you run into these massive technical hurdles that just can't be fixed overnight.
Especially when you think you've nailed all the physics and chemistry and everything else perfectly, but then the actual testing goes totally sideways and nothing works the way you imagined. 🙂

Anyway, I felt that specific part of the movie was a bit off too... it felt almost too much like a Hollywood cliché (🙂 ), where we're just super geniuses who can solve any problem in a heartbeat.

They really could have stretched that out a bit more and actually shown us the complications. After all, we aren't dealing with Earth's atmosphere here; we're talking about space, which is a completely different beast.

🙂

unspeakable said:I honestly don't know what to do with myself. I want to see Lenny Kravitz so badly, but none of my friends are going 😢 and the idea of just showing up there alone feels pretty depressing. Maybe I could head out with some of you guys who are planning to go? :trembling_heart:

Here's another one!

I'm heading out to grab a ticket today, so if everything works out, maybe we can coordinate something. It would be nice if we didn't all end up wandering around different sides of the stadium by ourselves. 🙂

Richard Hernandez13 said:Let me try to clear up this whole confusion regarding the word 'futuristic' when we talk about Sci-Fi.

He’s basically trying to draw a line between one type of Sci-Fi (like Metropolis and Blade Runner) and another type (things like world war and close encounters of the third kind).

...
So, are world war and close encounters.. Sci-Fi?
Yeah.

Why?
Both movies show a world where aliens arrive.

Are there aliens in our actual, objective world?
Not really, or at least that's what we're told. 😉

So, those two films depict a state of the world that doesn't exist.

Is that non-existent state scientifically explainable?
Sure—life evolved on some other planet... blah blah.

-now here's the important part-

Do those movies show an evolutionary future for our own world?
NO!

Why?
In both films, human civilization is at the exact same technological and social level as the era the movie actually takes place in. Specifically, the year '53 and '77.

So, I guess world war and close encounters... aren't futuristic Sci-Fi.

...
Are Metropolis and Blade Runner Sci-Fi?
Yes.

Why?
Because they depict an imagined, non-existent world (mind you, not just a non-existent state of the world). Back when both movies were made, nothing like the worlds shown in them existed anywhere.

Is that non-existent world scientifically explainable?
Yes.

Is that state of the world a possible evolutionary future for the worlds of that time?
Yes, though in Blade Runner, it's still entirely possible.

So, Metropolis and Blade Runner are futuristic Sci-Fi.

I don't want it to seem like I'm just taking Richard Hernandez13's side, but this is honestly such a great and clear explanation! 👍

Then again, I'm not really a fan of those hyper-theoretical, ultra-complex ways of splitting things into sub-genres and sub-sub-genres either. Since cinema changes (and honestly, since our whole civilization changes), certain settings change too. They might make sense now, or they might not, so sticking to old rules like a drunk driver seems pretty silly to me.

I mean, even dictionaries and encyclopedias get updated all the time, right?
🙂

But still, we have to stick to some rules during debates or discussions because we need some solid ground (or a "referee") to disagree on—otherwise, how would any progress or change ever happen?....
Just thinking out loud here. 🙂

For those who haven't seen it (looking at you, Gregory Smith4), this movie is highly regarded. It isn't quite a masterpiece—not on the level of The Right Stuff, for instance—especially regarding classic hard sci-fi since the science isn't explained deeply enough, but it’s pretty close.

On the flip side, certain parts are explained well enough that they make sense to an average viewer, specifically those bits that usually get skipped over in movies (stuff about frequencies and electromagnetic waves, etc.)...
I guess it's a relatively refreshing change of pace that everything doesn't follow the exact same tired formula...

Even though there's a connection to religion—specifically faith—I didn't take it as some kind of preaching or moralizing. There was zero of that, none at all (unlike how things go back home in our little corner of the world 🙂). Instead, the movie just captures what happens when we actually sit down to discuss these topics; it shows those debates where nobody really wins. I thought that part was handled brilliantly.

In my opinion, the weakest link isn't Nina Violić, but rather James Woods. He's a great actor, but he felt like a casting miss here.

All in all, I'd give it a solid 5 out of 5! 👍

p.s. When Jodie Foster was playing this role, she certainly wasn't "washed up"—she was easily one of the top three actresses in the world back then.
It seems like some people don't really bother with the facts when they comment on movies. 😉

p.p.s. It's interesting, but I don't really think Foster's character had a "hidden religious faith." It felt more like a belief in something much larger than ourselves, something we can't fully grasp because we're just tiny specks on this planet.

You won't believe this, but I actually went to see Troy again. The whole thing was just way too much 🙂...

I mean, look, I still think the film is great—and I want to be clear, there’s a difference between me personally liking it and the movie being objectively "good"... please notice that distinction!!!—but...

Man, whenever I see those planes flying overhead, I can't help but get seriously worried about what those massive millions were actually wasted on 😉

And honestly, I think they totally missed the mark with Brad Pitt's casting in this one...
If they had just darkened his hair a bit and given him some stubble instead of that perfectly groomed look, maybe he could have pulled it off without any trouble, but the way it is now, it just feels unconvincing.

It's pretty obvious why I didn't catch that the first time around. I guess you know why 😁

oooo
I guess redheron12 deserved it too 😘

wearyraven41, man, what was that all about? why'd you get so worked up?

if it's just some silly poll, I guess you should just skip the nonsense. maybe you could have just made a totally ridiculous post over there instead, which probably would've been pretty cool.

but doing it like this.... 😢

I mean, since Damson seems to show up and weigh in on pretty much every single thread, he could probably just be—well, Zak.

The only thing I don't quite get is how Zak managed to change his whole vibe. He doesn't seem as full of himself anymore, I guess.

🙂

I mean, I guess maybe the lock and those main support beams holding up the entrance just gave out after ten years of fighting, which is probably why they managed to break in.

Man, what cheap materials. Honestly, I’d love to hunt down the contractor who built Troy and give him a piece of my mind.

I don't buy any of that for a second!

I'm an atheist.

Oh boy, dear lord 🙏

Oh my god, Sean Bean 🙏

etcetera, etcetera...

🙂

I hope you meant that as a compliment to Lenny, boldeagle3...

I mean, let's not knock Metallica too hard. They're such a massive giant in their own lane compared to Lenny. The only real difference is their niche is a bit narrower, and I guess they aren't necessarily more mainstream than him either.

Nancy Kim2 said:......
I guess I just wish there were more scenes from The Odyssey.

But hey, you can't really complain when Sean Bean is in it... I mean, come on, it's Sean freaking Bean... did I mention he's actually a pretty cool actor? 😁

Man, Nancy Kim2, (😘 ) who even started this whole thing about Sean Bean here? I’m just saying he’s a legend, he’s underrated, and he plays such a massive 👎 role in the movie.
LONG LIVE SEAN BEAN!

I’m definitely going to see Lenny Kravitz. As for Metallica, I guess it just depends on my bank account, since I'm planning on catching Santana in July too, and I really don't want to go totally broke.

How does that guy Banderas put it? :2up: (Why? WHY?)

nimblemarlin17, good grief, I barely recognized you! I was just sitting here wondering who this new person was, giving a thumbs up to the movie and mentioning what was probably the best scene,
when it turns out you were just hiding behind Herr Ott (seriously, give me something a bit more attractive to look at!!!!!