|
Movies
Sept 27, 2018 22:00:29 GMT -5
Post by mikegarrison on Sept 27, 2018 22:00:29 GMT -5
It was just glaringly different than the other books. From the standpoint of an American, she rather smoothly integrated magical UK culture into real UK culture, including either directly or by analogue many cultural issues like British social classes and attitudes about the rest of Europe. And of course her quiddich was football (soccer). I just don't feel like she understands the US at all. Not disputing that, but I'm saying it could have been worse. That's not much consolation. It can always be worse.
|
|
|
Movies
Sept 27, 2018 22:44:29 GMT -5
Post by ironhammer on Sept 27, 2018 22:44:29 GMT -5
Not disputing that, but I'm saying it could have been worse. That's not much consolation. It can always be worse. I just try to look at the bright side of things.
|
|
|
Movies
Sept 27, 2018 23:04:05 GMT -5
Post by Wolfgang on Sept 27, 2018 23:04:05 GMT -5
I have The Post, ready to be viewed. Problem is, wife now wants to keep watching The Expanse, a show which, just a few weeks ago, both of us had written off.
|
|
|
Movies
Sept 30, 2018 19:32:29 GMT -5
Post by Wolfgang on Sept 30, 2018 19:32:29 GMT -5
The Post
Just finished watching it. I must be getting super sentimental in my old age but my eyes got watery and I had a lump in my throat at the end. I tried to make a comment about Ellsberg to my wife but my voice just quivered and she just looked at me, "What the heck? Are you crying?"
Freedom of the press will do that to ya.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Sept 30, 2018 23:40:42 GMT -5
Finally watched Dunkirk. I liked it. It was an interesting choice that a German is never shown the entire movie, but you are constantly aware of the pressure from the Germans.
|
|
|
Movies
Oct 1, 2018 7:38:40 GMT -5
Post by XAsstCoach on Oct 1, 2018 7:38:40 GMT -5
Just watched Deadpool 2 and Solo.
Deadpool 2 was funny, but was thinking it was the same humor as Deadpool again. New lines, yet the same as before.Besides, watching it with the cussing altered while in flight wasn’t as enjoyable. Did enjoy the cameo appearance of the new generation of X-Men.
Solo...I liked it but was a little confused. I had though Han freed Chewy while Chewy was being transported to some spaceship construction sight. This was in the EU during Lucas’ reign, I think. Guess Disney wants to show its their story now...no wonder fans hated it. Also thought Han smiled a bit too much. The actor was not a right fit. Lastly, guess u can say Ron Howard ( or the writers, if u will) gave a nod to the original Star Wars release (where Han shot Greedo first) when he shot Woody’s character first.
|
|
|
Movies
Oct 1, 2018 10:51:49 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by ironhammer on Oct 1, 2018 10:51:49 GMT -5
Finally watched Dunkirk. I liked it. It was an interesting choice that a German is never shown the entire movie, but you are constantly aware of the pressure from the Germans. It's interesting because the Germans were never referred as the "Germans" or "Nazis" in the movie, but simply the "enemy". And for the most part they were not featured on screen as soldiers, with their presence suggested instead by sniper fire or the enemy planes in the dogfight scene. I am guessing this "depersonalization" is to make the enemy more frightening, as if it was some kind of overwhelming beast to devour the stranded allied soldiers on the beach. As a cinematic device that was pretty effective I gotta say.
|
|
|
Movies
Oct 2, 2018 7:12:48 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Thrill of the 'ville on Oct 2, 2018 7:12:48 GMT -5
I finally saw American Animals (it never came to the theater I had gift cards for and the closest Redbox didn’t have it for awhile). I was intrigued by it because the actual true story was interesting and took place here in Lexington (although filmed elsewhere) but I was bored watching it. Including the real people involved for documentary-like scenes and changing things slightly when they’d conflict with one another was a unique touch but it was used so rarely I felt they should’ve done it more or not at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Movies
Oct 2, 2018 12:01:49 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2018 12:01:49 GMT -5
Finally watched Dunkirk. I liked it. It was an interesting choice that a German is never shown the entire movie, but you are constantly aware of the pressure from the Germans. It's interesting because the Germans were never referred as the "Germans" or "Nazis" in the movie, but simply the "enemy". And for the most part they were not featured on screen as soldiers, with their presence suggested instead by sniper fire or the enemy planes in the dogfight scene. I am guessing this "depersonalization" is to make the enemy more frightening, as if it was some kind of overwhelming beast to devour the stranded allied soldiers on the beach. As a cinematic device that was pretty effective I gotta say. Also, just a POV choice. The Germans are coming, but it's the British soldiers' story. I still want to see this again. The different timelines confused me a lot the first time. And it was hard to know who was who since they all looked so much alike.
|
|
|
Movies
Oct 2, 2018 12:54:33 GMT -5
Post by Wolfgang on Oct 2, 2018 12:54:33 GMT -5
The three different timelines were confusing because time was not moving at the same time for each timeline. I was somewhat confused (but eventually figured it out) but my wife amazingly was not confused at all from the get-go.
Land -- One week. The soldiers at the beach. Sea -- One day. The fishermen on the boat. Air -- One hour. The British fighter pilots.
So, the land story would go at a "snail's pace" for one week. The sea story would go somewhat faster for one day. And the air story would go briskly for one hour. The air story makes sense because the planes had only so much fuel. I mean, they can't fly forever. That's the first thing my wife noticed, the fact that days and nights would go by on land but the planes were still flying. "How could they fly for so long?" she asked, and then came to the conclusion about the different rate of time movement.
The film gave written indications by showing on screen: "By air: one hour" But when you view the film for the first time, you're disoriented so you don't know what that means until you've seen the film for a bit. And even then, you have to remember the words "By air: one hour" and come to the conclusion about the compressed timeline compared to the land and sea stories.
|
|
|
Movies
Oct 2, 2018 15:04:06 GMT -5
Post by dgo on Oct 2, 2018 15:04:06 GMT -5
The three different timelines were confusing because time was not moving at the same time for each timeline. I was somewhat confused (but eventually figured it out) but my wife amazingly was not confused at all from the get-go. Land -- One week. The soldiers at the beach. Sea -- One day. The fishermen on the boat. Air -- One hour. The British fighter pilots. So, the land story would go at a "snail's pace" for one week. The sea story would go somewhat faster for one day. And the air story would go briskly for one hour. The air story makes sense because the planes had only so much fuel. I mean, they can't fly forever. That's the first thing my wife noticed, the fact that days and nights would go by on land but the planes were still flying. "How could they fly for so long?" she asked, and then came to the conclusion about the different rate of time movement. The film gave written indications by showing on screen: "By air: one hour" But when you view the film for the first time, you're disoriented so you don't know what that means until you've seen the film for a bit. And even then, you have to remember the words "By air: one hour" and come to the conclusion about the compressed timeline compared to the land and sea stories. Christopher Nolan does some really interesting things with timelines in his movies. Memento is one of my favorite movies ever, and I recommend it highly.
|
|
|
Movies
Oct 2, 2018 15:40:04 GMT -5
Post by mikegarrison on Oct 2, 2018 15:40:04 GMT -5
And then there is the historical timeline, in which the sea evacuation went on for 9 days, as opposed to 1 in the movie. But the "little ships" were only active for part of those 9 days. The yacht that is featured in the movie is pretty obviously a fictionalized version of this one: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundowner_(yacht) The Sundowner only made one trip there and back, because after a while they limited the "little ships" to only those that could sail 20 knots or faster. The owner/captain of that yacht happened to also be the highest-ranking officer to survive the sinking of the Titanic.
|
|
|
Movies
Oct 2, 2018 15:52:52 GMT -5
Post by vbbetterthanbb on Oct 2, 2018 15:52:52 GMT -5
Forgot to highly recommend this amusing and amazing documentary: How did a comptroller/treasurer for a small town in Illinois, with an annual budget of $8 millions, manage to steal $53 millions over 22 years? That's all while the city has had to borrow heavily and still didn't have enough money for road repairs!
|
|
|
Movies
Oct 2, 2018 17:47:10 GMT -5
Post by Wolfgang on Oct 2, 2018 17:47:10 GMT -5
We watched All the President's Men (1976) after The Post (2017), back to back. While the former was about Watergate and the latter was about the Pentagon Papers, they both involved investigations by the The Washington Post. All the President's Men seemed like a sequel (even if it wasn't) to The Post even though the former was made in 1976 and the latter in 2017. In fact, the very last scene of The Post of the Watergate break-in including camera angles and content were almost identical to the first scene in All the President's Men. Spielberg probably did this on purpose.
I like watching movies and TV shows like this; that is, watching related things in sequence in a marathon or binge session. A month or so ago, the wife and I did this with the Planet of the Apes reboots: we watched Rise of the Planet of the Apes, followed by Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, and then War for the Planet of the Apes.
Back in the late 1980s, I did the same with the Back to the Future movies. I hadn't seen Back to the Future I and II. So, when Back to the Future III was released in theaters, I rented Back to the Future I and II on VHS and took 4 hours to watch them. Then, that same day, I went to the theater to watch Back to the Future III. This, to me, is the best way to watch related content -- in chronological order, back to back to back, while the information is still fresh in your head and your motivation and interest are optimally high.
I have to do this for the Harry Potter movies as well as The Lord of the Rings movies someday.
Also, a few months ago, we watched Rogue One (2016) and the Star Wars IV: A New Hope (1977). It was a natural progression where one passed the baton to the other.
|
|
|
Movies
Oct 2, 2018 18:23:54 GMT -5
Post by mikegarrison on Oct 2, 2018 18:23:54 GMT -5
Well, Back To The Future II and III were filmed together, so they should have seemed like they had a natural progression. Back To The Future I was filmed separately, which is why Marty's gf is played by a different actress.
|
|