I'd like to know what you think about it. I'll check out M. Butterfly
Last Film You Watched? VI
Posts: 566
Joined:
July 2010
Dead Ringers might have been Cronenberg's best 80's film had he not made The Fly.
I just saw Ready Player One, and although I was pretty thoroughly entertained from the perspective of 3D, audio eargasm, and gaming lore, it really hurt with its suspension of disbelief and plot holes galore.
By suspension of disbelief, I am not referring to the idea of the OASIS and the technology. I am referring to the logical aspects that were never touched upon. There are dozens of them. It really did hamper my experience.
I also think Speilberg played a lot of moments really safe, which is just too bad.
Not a bad one to own though.
By suspension of disbelief, I am not referring to the idea of the OASIS and the technology. I am referring to the logical aspects that were never touched upon. There are dozens of them. It really did hamper my experience.
I also think Speilberg played a lot of moments really safe, which is just too bad.
Not a bad one to own though.
Unbreakable
Masterpiece.
Split
Still pretty great.
Masterpiece.
Split
Still pretty great.
Dead Ringers is beautifully tense, perverted,disturbing and ,as is the case with most of Cronenberg's work,oddly humorous.
Crash is still my favourite Cronenberg film though,and one of my favourite books I may add.It's as good as a adaption you can get,even with its ever so slight differences from the source material.
Crash is still my favourite Cronenberg film though,and one of my favourite books I may add.It's as good as a adaption you can get,even with its ever so slight differences from the source material.
My main gripe with Ready Player One boils down to me having little to no emotional connection with the performers.I thought they were all painfully bland in their roles,especially the lead.MuffinMcFluffin wrote: ↑August 7th, 2018, 2:43 pmI just saw Ready Player One, and although I was pretty thoroughly entertained from the perspective of 3D, audio eargasm, and gaming lore, it really hurt with its suspension of disbelief and plot holes galore.
By suspension of disbelief, I am not referring to the idea of the OASIS and the technology. I am referring to the logical aspects that were never touched upon. There are dozens of them. It really did hamper my experience.
I also think Speilberg played a lot of moments really safe, which is just too bad.
Not a bad one to own though.
Once the ott CGI moments kicked in my investment in their goals were steadily declining.Which is the complete opposite to the recent Avengers film.
despite loving the movie, both of you highlight why I think I'd hate the source material.
Not often I see a movie and think I'd hate the book.
-Vader
Not often I see a movie and think I'd hate the book.
-Vader
Spoke to someone who read the book a while back and he absolutely loathed it (RPO).
Dont think he'll go near the film anytime soon.
For what it's worth, this is a review that summarizes much of my own opinion:
(spoilers)
-Vader
(spoilers)
I also think spielberg is doing a meta-narrative thing through the digital artifice of cinema and storytelling he more or less created through Jurassic Park.t's more a self-reflection on Spielberg's career and impact on pop culture than it is on video gaming and the internet and it's relationship to real life social interactions.
The big misreading a lot of people have of the film: it's about fanboys gatekeeping, about how a boy and his friends obsessed over pop culture and because they did, they were rewarded for it.
But that isn't how Samantha and Wade won. They won because they read past the pop culture references. They looked past Halliday's aesthetic and fetishism and read the man for who is. They understood the artist. They're the people who watch E.T. and understand it's about a little boy losing his father and trying to come up with the one thing wonderous enough that might be able to substitute him.
Samantha and Wade aren't the fanboys and gatekeepers, even if they are as trivially studied as them and often times find themselves among them. Their skill isn't just trivia, it's empathy. It's their ability to look past the flashing lights and easily digestible pop content, and see what's behind it.
This is Spielberg criticising his legacy. Looking at it, poking at it, examining it's contribution to society. And his conclusion? Look at what he's done. Look at what his generation of filmmakers has done. Love it, let it define you even, but don't get lost in it. Grow from it. Add to it. Create a new generation of pop culture, of art, that will inspire the next generation as much as he inspired ours.
-Vader
I loved the book. There's definitely a more emotional core and better world-building in there. The "references" also had a more prominent impact on the story and weren't there "just to spot them" like in the film. The only scene that kind of had the soul of the book was the Shining scene and that's the highlight of the movie. The quest for the egg is also more of an adventure, you go in this journey through 80's culture, some popular, some obscure and you really feel that in the book. Here, there's too many RANDOM references that don't really connect to each other.
I also hate the look of recent Spielberg films, RPO included. They're overlit, with a bland color palette. The last good one was War Horse. I hoped for a more classic 80's Spielberg cinematography with this one.
I also hate the look of recent Spielberg films, RPO included. They're overlit, with a bland color palette. The last good one was War Horse. I hoped for a more classic 80's Spielberg cinematography with this one.
