briskbison41 said:I haven't actually sat down to watch it yet, but it looks decent enough for a standard romantic drama.🙂
IMDb
Trailer
Ugh, I wouldn't call that movie a "romantic drama" under any circumstances. Sure, it's a drama, but that word "romantic" just feels wrong to me. Honestly, watching it was pretty brutal. The whole atmosphere is just suffocating, and the story is so heavy... all you're left with after the credits roll is this intense sense of anxiety and pure discomfort.
Morgan Ortiz2 said:Nah... names ought to stay exactly as they are. If someone really feels the need, they could just toss the translation in parentheses afterward. It’s honestly a miracle they didn't go ahead and "translate" Harry Potter too.🙄
I didn't find that even remotely relaxing. Look, I wasn't expecting some deep masterpiece or anything, just something lighthearted to laugh at, but instead, I got pure grotesque garbage. It’s just proof of how mindless and numb people have become—zero empathy and absolutely no clue what actual humor even means anymore. Because for me, this movie was anything but funny.
My god, what a grotesque mess of a movie. Honestly, I found it totally repulsive and impossible to sit through. Based on the premise, you’d think it was going to be some cute little Christmas comedy, but instead—ugh, just gross. I seriously don't get how this stuff passes for "humor" these days. Man, it feels like people just can't make a decent comedy anymore.
Look, it's way easier to just be a sheep. It's easier to be an "idiot"—and by that I mean someone who just takes everything they were ever taught about how the world works for granted without ever actually thinking about it—than to actually use your own brain, you know? I don't get those people either, but I get where they're coming from. I think it all stems from this stupid FEAR of anything they perceive as "different," which they automatically label as bad. And honestly, most of those loudmouth homophobes are actually just closeted, because a guy who is 100% secure in his sexuality has zero reason to lash out at someone with different preferences... unless he's terrified that he might have those same inclinations buried deep inside him 😉 I mean, most guys are SO insecure about their masculinity (probably because they were raised thinking guys have to be tough, strong, never cry, and never act "soft," etc.), and the second that feels threatened, they take it as a personal attack. They tie their entire self-worth to being masculine. So, underneath all that homophobia, there's just nothing but complexes, insecurities, fears, and a literal DECISION to stay ignorant and never grow as a person... plus a total lack of empathy. Just total.
@ AoF
Second-class? Come on, prove me wrong. I'm dead serious, I love debating stuff like this, and since we're on a psychology forum, I'm guessing you've got something to say about it. I'd love a first-rate analysis just to see what you've got 😬 👍 ( I mean, I'm definitely not saying I'm some expert in psychoanalysis or anything, and I'm not even a psych major—but when it comes to thinking about psychological or emotional stuff, I try to be super thorough and analytical to get to the "root" of things, so I'm dying for a constructive, decent debate here 🙂 )
Henry Williams said:I have to admit, sometimes stirring the pot can be a lot of fun.🙂 Most liberals are just spineless people with zero backbone. Especially those "soft" types you see all over the coasts.
And honestly, people who get a kick out of unargumentative and, frankly, totally senseless and... non-provocative provocations 😬 are usually just folks who felt worthless and oppressed growing up, so now they try to make up for their inferiority complex by acting 'tough' and 'powerful' because they live in this delusion that they're actually bullying someone. In reality, they're just providing great material for psychoanalysis 👍 but hey, we're on a psychology thread 😉
slypuma17 said:But let’s be realistic: not the entirety of Berlin is a stroll through hand-holding bliss, especially once you step outside those specific bubbles. Sure, maybe on Kurfürstendamm, but just a few miles further out? Not a chance. The same logic applies to Paris, or any other major metropolitan hub. Tolerance is something we are still moving toward, not something we have already conquered, despite what some people might claim.
As for the homophobes—without getting too specific because I honestly can't fathom their headspace—they could really stand to use a bit of common sense.
How can anyone harbor hatred for people who pose absolutely zero competition to them? These men should actually be feeling quite satisfied that more women will be available to them, given that "those types" aren't interested in competing for that same pool. 🤷 There is also zero risk of a wife leaving them for a man like that, or catching them in bed with her. Yet, they seem even more tolerant toward lesbians, even though those are women who, theoretically, would be available to them! 😵
I simply cannot wrap my head around these people, no matter how hard I try. I can almost follow the twisted internal logic of fascists, but this... this is just baffling. 🤷
Well, you can't understand them because you just don't have that specific mental wiring. I guess the main thing to realize is how the way we were raised—how we basically soaked everything up like sponges as kids—shapes our entire lives, our worldview, how we act, and how we handle relationships, both with others and ourselves. See, the point is that sexuality, ESPECIALLY sexual orientation factor, was always kept hidden from kids... children never even got the chance to see two people of the same gender being affectionate or kissing or whatever. Because kids RECOGNIZE love and they FEEL it. So, if you show a kid who hasn't been conditioned yet two men or two women kissing and loving each other, it would just be INTERESTING to them, not weird. It would be new—just like everything else they see in this world—because kids learn through conditioning. It’s the same deal with most people growing up in families where homosexuality is treated as a "taboo," and when it is mentioned, it's always in a negative light. It isn't just about the family, though—it's about the whole world (which, obviously, exists because every single person is RAISED in a certain way—paradoxical, I know, but you can't have one without the other) and the general "vibe" out there. And the vibe is such that people automatically DISMISS anything that is "generally accepted" as unnatural and gross. PERIOD. People, because it's UNKNOWN and STRANGE to them, automatically start fearing it and want to push "that" away—mostly because they are terrified for their own sense of "normalcy." They're so scared of being unloved by anyone that they reflexively shove things into the "normal" box just because they think it guarantees acceptance. And then what happens? People refuse to THINK. They refuse to allow themselves EMPATHY. They refuse to ask, "Wait a second, isn't this just falling in love? Aren't they just... people? How would I feel in their shoes?" Like, if I fell for someone of the same sex against my will, those feelings would feel NATURAL (!). So isn't it actually unnatural to go against your own nature? It's just that the whole concept of homosexuality is so controversial to them that they don't even bother thinking deeper about it. If they did, they'd reach this incredible, yet incredibly BARELY-NOTICED realization: "Wait, what's actually so weird about this?" Because seriously, I mean it: what is actually so weird?
Henry Williams said:What if someone is actually totally indifferent toward gay people, but they just play the homophobe role just to mess with those weak-willed liberals?😕 😢
I guess I'd call that person a 'weakling,' not the others 😉
( clearly they've got some kind of complex where they 'provoke' people just to feel better about themselves. Like, 'stronger' or 'superior,' whatever. )
slypuma17 said:As if that were exclusive to us? 😁 It isn’t like that everywhere. Even in the most "liberal" American metropolises, the freedom to publicly display one's preferences is often confined to specific ghettoized districts within those cities—or perhaps just that little area we call "downtown," where there's usually enough police presence, surveillance cameras, and general protection to keep things contained. And that's about it. Step outside those boundaries, and you're acting at your own risk, facing potentially dire consequences.
Still, I get the impression that lesbians tend to navigate society a bit more easily than gay men do; it seems like people look the other way much more frequently when it comes to them.
Why is it that homophobes practice this kind of discrimination? 🤷
I guess that last part was probably just a rhetorical question, but whatever, it doesn't matter:
Assuming most die-hard homophobes are male: it's because two women together are seen as "sexy" (especially if some guy thinks he can wedge himself in), so they don't even take it seriously (like it isn't actual homosexuality... or like there aren't real feelings involved... but honestly, homophobes don't even think about homosexuals as PEOPLE who FEEL things for one another...). Meanwhile, two guys together are supposedly "the most disgusting and unnatural thing in the world." Here's the psychology behind it: two women being together doesn't THREATEN a homophobe's masculinity at all; if anything, it just HIGHLIGHTS it. But two men? That's a direct threat to how they perceive themselves and their own manhood. So, I guess, deep down, homophobes are actually super insecure about their own masculinity/sexuality, and gay guys just mirror back a part of themselves they'd never admit to (mostly to themselves, let alone anyone else). To them, gay people are a direct threat to their masculinity. So, for those homophobes, "attack" is basically their best defense.
slypuma17 said:Well, if that was the goal, why didn't you just ask it that way? 🤣 This whole "weighting factor" business just adds unnecessary baggage to the conversation.
Because, frankly, there are some of us here who don't see any particular weight or tragedy in the matter at all.
Exactly! Honestly, I don't even get what people think needs to be 'accepted' here. 🤷
The way I see it—which is just pure logic, I guess—when two people fall in love, it’s about the FEELINGS they have for one another (which is pretty much the best thing ever 😍). When two people hug, kiss, or touch, it’s just lips and skin and... well, it's just being human 😍
I actually really liked 🙂. It was pretty gripping, tense, and the acting and directing were solid. It gets a little predictable toward the end, I guess, but that didn't really kill the tension or how much I was sucked into the story. Just totally awesome 😍. My one tiny gripe: that voice-over really got on my nerves. I usually love them, but the lead actor's voice in that narration just rubbed me the wrong way... maybe it felt a bit too... pretentious? Whatever, it's a small thing. Overall, though, I walked out of the theater smiling and just saying, "Man, that was great!" 👍
Anthony Bailey said:It's not some chick flick, the movie's alright. ☕
? Like, what does it even matter if it isn't a chick flick (not like I watch those anyway)?! The movie is sci-fi (I actually love sci-fi) and as far as sci-fi goes—it's just bad, boring, and totally uninteresting... I'd even go so far as to say it's exhausting in parts. If I'm watching a sci-fi/action flick and I don't care about the plot or how things wrap up (and again—I LOVE sci-fi), then who's the crazy one here?
But whatever, I'm just talking about my own take (since that's all I can really do), so hey, I'm glad you liked it and thought Hayden was sexy😉
This movie is stupid as hell. Actually, it’s even stupider than that.
First off, calling this an 'action spectacle'... give me a break. It was deathly BORING. Look, I’m the kind of person who actually likes slow-burn movies, so I don't get bored easily... but THIS? Which is supposed to be fast-paced? Total yawn material. The camerawork was a mess, but honestly, nothing compares to the brain-dead plot (the concept itself is fine, but the execution is just pure idiocy), the moronic dialogue, the zero sense of humor, and the forced, emotionless acting from the leads (and here I was thinking Hayden Christensen finally learned how to act... what a joke. I mean, he was great in 😍, pulling everything he could out of a terrible role—can't blame him if the script is complete garbage).... I don't know, the whole thing just felt messy and disorganized. The 'action scenes' weren't even engaging, and frankly, I couldn't care less how it ended. Seriously. And then you find out there's a sequel coming... oh, the horror.
Arthur Garcia59 said:Maybe I just convinced myself the movie was decent because I love the story so much, even though it actually wasn't great. I don't know, I'm just repeating myself... I really don't know... But the book hit me hard, so maybe I'm just subconsciously doing that...
It doesn't have to be that way at all. Actually, everyone’s take is different—that's obvious. When we watch a movie, we bring our own stuff to it, which basically makes us part of the creative process too. Like how you didn't feel the chemistry or the love between Robbie and Cee in Atonement, so the story didn't carry any emotional weight for you. For me, it was the exact opposite because I'm totally "in love" with their romance, which felt visible to me in every single moment of the film. 😍
To me, it makes total sense that you liked the movie since you're a huge fan of the book. I guess (and I'm just saying, I don't know) that I might have liked it even less if I had read the book first, because it would always be hanging over my head and I wouldn't have been able to just experience the movie for what it is. All those things BIGLY affect how you see things.
p.s. I wasn't "yelling" with the caps, I was just trying to emphasize my point.
Personally, that was one of the WEIRDEST (!) movies I've ever seen. By the end, I felt like I’d watched something that was both pretty good and INCREDIBLY BAD at the exact same freaking time. I caught a private screening about a month ago... I haven't read the book, unfortunately (my bad, my bad, my biggest bad), but from the very start of the movie, I kept thinking, "Man, this must have been handled beautifully in the book"—that was basically the main thought looping in my head. Just regarding the plot, the ideas, and how they were executed at the end. But the movie itself? It just didn't get there, in my opinion. Emotionally speaking, it was SO SO confusing (and I'm sure the book is much "cleaner" in that regard) that while the story was unfolding, I literally DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK. Like, I felt a little bad for the lead guy, which also kind of annoyed me, but I didn't feel anything for her at all—and her "love" for him? Even less so (though I did dig what she said about illusion, so I guess I agree with her on that bit)....of course, it bugged me that they used two different actors for him and only one actress for her (wtf?!), and the fact that the movie was in English. I mean, seriously, if you're gonna do it in English, if you absolutely have to, at least use a normal British or American accent, or whatever, but not English with a Spanish accent--->that totally made the whole movie feel fake to me ( "what is love?" yeah, right, as if I'd believe you actually care when you ask it LIKE THAT 🤣 ), and honestly, they really should have filmed it in Spanish. Plus, Spanish sounds so much better.... Oh, and those sex scenes....🤣 I swear, I was watching them laughing, and I wasn't even sure if I was supposed to be laughing or crying. My brain was just constantly throwing out thoughts like: "Are they being serious?", "They've gotta be joking," "No fucking way," "Uhm....is this INTENTIONALLY like this!?!". It was honestly somewhere between a parody and a grotesque mess, if you ask me. And something tells me that wasn't the goal...but hey, the impression is there, and it's not just me.
Toward the end, I guess my impression improved a bit and I actually enjoyed it....the music is lovely. But after the whole ballad ended, walking out of the theater, I felt like I'd watched something that, in the right hands, could have been potentially high-quality, beautifully nuanced, emotional, and—totally devastating. Instead of all those feelings, I just felt like IT COULD HAVE BEEN THAT!
So, regarding how you say "daemon"... I guess in the original American version, the author actually intended for it to be pronounced just like the word "demon" 😉 but hey, don't quote me on that.
Look, let me just quote what I said over on the literature subforum:
(*SPOILERS*)
I am honestly obsessed... seriously, this movie totally hit the spot for me on every level. I loved basically everything (except maybe when the girl's acting was slightly off here and there, but whatever... she had a few weak moments, but mostly she was great). What really worked for me was how they actually fleshed out the characters; she captured Lyra's character and her whole vibe perfectly, including how incredibly smart and resourceful she is. Not to mention the emotional connection with Iorek and that beautiful depiction of why daemons matter and their bond with people. I almost teared up during the scene where she finds little Billy after he gets "cut," and when they nearly separated her from her daemon. I read the book about a year and a half ago, just once (lack of time 😢 😢 😢), so I don't remember every single detail, but I think the movie stays true to the book and, honestly, I'm just beyond happy with it 😍. Maybe when I re-read it (hopefully soon), I'll have more complaints... but I'm not one of those people who demands a flawless adaptation. I respect both the book and the movie as two totally different mediums trying to tell the same story using different tools, so I get that you can't check every box from the book, and I don't personally care. As long as the movie keeps the "feeling" of the book and stays faithful to that, it's fine by me. And in my opinion, it totally nailed it 👍 My only gripe is that it's kind of stupid they didn't use the ending from the book... the transition between worlds... but hey, I didn't complain when Gollum wasn't in the first LOTR movie but showed up in the third, so I won't whine about this either. I'll just expect it in the next movie 😁 😁 😁 Oh, and the plot—I think they explained everything as best they could. My friend who hasn't even read the book followed everything easily and said it wasn't confusing at all, that everything was well-developed, so if you ask me (or her), that's definitely not a weak point . Honestly, I have no idea where all these terrible reviews are coming from... I just don't get it. But hey, to each their own, I guess!
