maegul

I wanted to like it for basically everything going for it - premise, Pattinson, Bong, sci-fi, “original” film - but came out pretty much as bitter as I have ever after a film. I’m not one to do it, but I was close to walking out on it.

There are some touches of what the film could have been, some moments maybe. But on the whole it felt like a train wreck where I’d bet that people knew on set that it just wasn’t going to work.

At some point I noticed there was a good amount of yelling from the actors (I’m wondering if that’s just me) and can’t help but suspect it was the director or actors trying to find energy in scenes that were struggling. Or maybe that happened in the edit. Then there’s Ruffulo and Collette’s satirical characters that just didn’t land and felt dumb and amateur (along with Poor Things, I’m thinking Ruffulo is just not good and “original” film makers would do well to stay away)

All up, I think it’s embarrassingly bad, or “objectively” bad. No real depth, no coherence or pacing or well directed momentum, much of the comedy doesn’t land, characters and plot often feel like afterthoughts, and it got boring too.

I think this movie review (from a pleasantly non-hype yt channel) says it better than I can.

What’s funny is I think a lot of people want this to be good. For the sake of original, fun, quirky, satirical films (and honestly, me too). But are stuck confronting a film that’s only making that situation worse not better and which represents the risks that studios need to accept not the successes they don’t understand).

Am I off here? I was pleased to find the review I linked as it seemed to match my thoughts.

EDIT - epilogue

And on the point about the fate of films … I saw this in the cinema (somewhat in support of original films) and dragged a friend too.

It was expensive. There was bad behaviour in the cinema (people taking photos with flash of each other!). And the film was bad, IMO, in a way that I feel people should have been more honest about (like I said, I think people wanted this to be good). Plus my friend doesn’t trust my choice in movies any more.

It’s really put me off going to the cinemas TBH. I’ll see how I end up feeling over time, but I think this might have been the straw that broke my back on the whole cinema thing. In part, sadly, because I don’t get how the film was that bad.

Of Eggers' works, I've only seen The Northman and this, Nosferatu.

I can confidently say that I like very much what these films are and where they are coming from. I'm almost guaranteed to see Eggers' next film. And, without wanting to see Nosferatu again, I have a general longing to see a film like Nosferatu over the next few days just to dig into the vibe more (I should probably see his earlier films now).

All to say that this film basically delivers on what you'd hope, with probably some surprises and compelling parts.

But what compelled me to write this was that I walked away from Nosferatu with almost exactly the same feeling I had after The Northman ... that I really wanted to see the better version of that film, that there was something missing, something perhaps slight and subtle but also essential for making the films truly great or to at least wash away an itch that there are annoying flaws.

I'm by no means qualified to describe what these things are or to work if they're just me-problems, but I'm struck by having exactly the same feeling after both films and that Eggers is the sole writer of both films. Because what I think I struggle with probably comes down to writing choices.

Watching both films, I thought to myself that Eggers struggles to stitch the dramatic aspects of his films with their atmospheric parts, which in his hands are vital to his style. Sometimes I wondered if a scene really needed to be there or as long, or needed to interrupt the flow of what was cut from before, or couldn't have better dialogue or more focused acting. It just feels like the moment he decides to have a straight dramatic sequence, with dialogue etc, he kind of doesn't know what he's doing nearly as much, let alone how to bind those components into a cohesive whole along with the more intense and supernatural components.

I'm curious now to watch The Lighthouse, which Eggers wrote along with his brother, to see if I can pick on a difference.

Thinking more broadly, as much as I liked an enjoyed Nosferatu, and will probably watch it again at some point, I do feel it is flawed. I could imagine a directors cut being interesting.

But generally, for me, it was downhill from about the middle onwards (basically after "Orlok's Castle" sequence (which was brilliant I thought, and along with the film's opening, easily the highlights I'd look forward to on rewatch).

Thinking about it along with "The Northman", I wonder if Eggers struggled to adapt pre-existing stories. With Nosferatu, for me personally, it certainly took away from the strength of the film that I new the basic structure of the story ahead of time, which for a vibey horror film becomes a serious distraction at some point. And I don't think Eggers really had too much to bring to the final act of the story TBH (apart from that shot/frame, I guess, which if you've seen the film you can probably guess). I certainly would find it interesting if the story told were only loosly inspired by Stoker's and Murnau's prior works.

Anyone else get where I'm coming from? Anyone with a better take on it than me?

While territorial claims are and will likely be heated, what struck me is that the area is right near the Drake Passage, in the Weddell Sea (which is fundamental to the world's ocean currents AFAIU).

I don't know how oil drilling in the antarctic could affect the passage, but still, I'm not sure I would trust human oil hunger with a 10ft pole on that one.

Also interestingly, the discovery was made by Russia, which is a somewhat ominous clue about where the current "multi-polar" world and climate change are heading. Antarctica, being an actual continent that thrived with life up until only about 10-30 M yrs ago, is almost certainly full of resources.

It's funny, at time of posting, many of the YT comments are very nostalgic about how much has happened in this 8 year period ... and I can't lie, I feel it too god damn it.

Rant …

… End rant.

A nice and fair comparison I thought. The main difference, it seems, was the styles of the two films, where a bunch of stylistic choices rather disparate from whether CGI was used or not separate the two.

My take after seeing furiosa was that it's biggest flaw was that its makers struggled with the expectations of Fury Road and I think these stylistic differences kinda support that, where I'd guess they felt like they had to go with a different look and not simply repeat Fury Road's aesthetic when in the end there may not have been much of a coherent artistic purpose behind those changes.

Yes, I'm slow, sorry!

Now this may very well be excessive expectations. I had heard a few people say it's this year's Andor. IE, you should just watch it even if it's not the sort of thing you think you'd be into. Also, I've never played the games

I've just finished the first 2 episodes, and, for me, it's not bad, it's a kinda interesting world ... but there's a distinctly empty feeling and awkwardness to the show for me. Sometimes scenes feel like they're either filling time or still trying to find their rhythm. I'm not sure any of the dialogue has caught my ear (at all). I'm not sure I've picked up on any interesting stakes or mysteries. And I've often wondered about the directing (where I can't help but wonder if Jonathan Nolan's directing is more about trying to compete with his brother).

The soft tipping point for me was the Knight's fight with the Ghoul (episode 2) ... it just felt pointless and childish. The whole scene seemed to strangely lack any gravity or impetus. And I find myself ~2.5 hrs in and not caring about anything that's happening. It's a post nuclear apocalypse world, with some mutants, a naive bunker person, and a manipulative corporation or two doing sneaky shit ...

... dunno ... what am I missing? Should I just keep watching?

Watching this, and seeing more of these types of interviews from Corridor Crew, it struck me that it's filling the void left by death of DVDs/BluRays and their special features.

I looked around and struggled to find out what it does?

My guess would be that it notifies you of when new posts are made to communities you subscribe to. But that sounds like a lot, so I'm really not sure.

Otherwise, is it me or does the wording here not speak for itself?

Generally, the lens I've come to criticise any/all fediverse projects is how well they foster community building. One reason why I like and "advocate" for the lemmy/threadiverse side of things is precisely because of this and how the centrality of the community/sub/group is a good way of organising social media (IMO).

Also, because of that, I recently came to be skeptical of the effects that the "All" feed can have. I didn't even realise that people relied mostly on the All feed until recently.

I think I've reached the point now of being against it (at least tentatively). I know, it's a staple and there's no way it's going away. And I know it's useful.

But thinking about the feature set, through the community building lens, I think it'd be fair to say that things are out of balance: they don't promote community building enough while also providing the All feed which dissolves community building.

Not really a criticism of the developers ... AFAIU, the All feed is easier to implement than any other community building feature ... and it's expected from reddit (though it isn't normal on forums AFAICT, which is maybe worth considering for anyone happy to reassess what about reddit is retained and what isn't).

But still, I can imagine a platform that is more focused on communities:

• Community explorer tool built in.
  • Could even be a substitute for an All feed ... where you can browse through various communities you don't know about and see what they've posted recently
• Multi-communities (long time coming by now for many I'd say)
  • Could even be part of the community explorer tool where you can create on-the-fly multi-communities to see their posts in a temporary feed
• Private and local only communities (already here on lemmy and coming for private communities)
• Post visibility options for Public communities (IE, posts that opt-in private)
• More flexible notifications for various things/events that happen within a community
• Wikis
• Chat interface
  • I'm thinking this is pretty viable given that Lemmy used to use a web-socket auto-updating design ... add that to the flat chat view and you've got a chat room. There are resource issues, so limiting them to one per community or 6hrs per week per community or something would probably be necessary.

A possibly interesting and frustrating aspect of all of these suggestions/ideas above is I can see their federation being problematic or difficult ... which raises the issue of whether there's serious tension between platform design and protocol capabilities.

There are also some gems in there about how old and constant underplaying the amount of VFX in a film is.

From the video, Stand By Me had a VFX shot (the train bridge scene, of course) but no one was allowed to talk about that. And of course The Fugitive train crash scene had to have "real trains" even though it's all mostly miniatures.

Lets try this experiment

Start watching Big Trouble in Little China at 7pm, Central Time, USA (as precisely as you can) ... and come here for live posts as you watch!

This is ~24 hours from the time of this post

Here's a timeanddate.com link to the timezone(s) involved.

@AVincentInSpace@pawb.social jas volunteered to run a live watch on cytube the day afterward (approx 7pm Monday). Posts and links should be coming (and see comments below on the idea).