Thematic elements were often heavy handed, and the dialogue often trite. However, the cinematography was fantastic and the visuals were spectacular.
Not quite sure how the dialogue was trite as she was either just talking to herself or to Kowalski (and that was just in the beginning).
thought the thematic elements were a good mix of obvious and subtle. Movies appeal to more people that way.
Just as a simple example, the discussion of her family status with Kowalski is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have been discussed long before. At this point, they've been working together for months in close quarters.
Saw it last night, loved every single minute of it except thepart, Jesus that was horrible.woof woof i'm a dog
Naw, I have worked in close quarters with people for long periods of times and not spoken about my personal life.Who is to say that she didn't have a closer relationship to some of the other crew members?
Kowalski struck me as the been there, done that captain, who might use charm to endear himself to others but not get in close, in terms of the fine details of someone's life.
It seems that in that moment, he was trying to get at something personal to inspire her, give her hope, keep her forging ahead. Keep her mind off the current circumstances, if you will. I don't think he was ready for what he actually found once he started digging.
Naw, I have worked in close quarters with people for long periods of times and not spoken about my personal life. Who is to say that she didn't have a closer relationship to some of the other crew members?
Kowalski struck me as the been there, done that captain, who might use charm to endear himself to others but not get in close, in terms of the fine details of someone's life.
It seems that in that moment, he was trying to get at something personal to inspire her, give her hope, keep her forging ahead. Keep her mind off the current circumstances, if you will. I don't think he was ready for what he actually found once he started digging.
There's lots of exposition that fits this criteria: Stone's discussion of her motion sickness, for example, strikes me as the sort of thing that would have come up ages ago in training, let alone in the week in space prior. There's lots of explanatory exposition that struck me as inauthentic.
However, these are again not the best examples: Stone's.final speech, about it being an amazing ride whether she lives or dies, is a very obvious and shallow analogy
It's fine, of course. This is clearly intended to be a pop movie, and as far as pop movies go this one was excellent.
There's lots of exposition that fits this criteria: Stone's discussion of her motion sickness, for example, strikes me as the sort of thing that would have come up ages ago in training, let alone in the week in space prior. There's lots of explanatory exposition that struck me as inauthentic.
However, these are again not the best examples: Stone's.final speech, about it being an amazing ride whether she lives or dies, is a very obvious and shallow analogy
It's fine, of course. This is clearly intended to be a pop movie, and as far as pop movies go this one was excellent.
Saw it in IMAX earlier and was kinda pissed it didn't take up the full screen. Anyone know why the ends of it were chopped off?
Saw it in IMAX earlier and was kinda pissed it didn't take up the full screen. Anyone know why the ends of it were chopped off?
Just as a simple example, the discussion of her family status with Kowalski is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have been discussed long before. At this point, they've been working together for months in close quarters. There are other, more spoiler-y examples.
I'm not interested in movies being popular (or unpopular). I'm interested in them being intellectually sophisticated. I am fine if that requires a lower budget.
This does not mean I did not like the movie; as stated, I did. But "it's a good movie" does not mean it had no flaws. Very few films are so well made as to be practically above criticism, and this isn't one of them.
There's lots of exposition that fits this criteria: Stone's discussion of her motion sickness, for example, strikes me as the sort of thing that would have come up ages ago in training, let alone in the week in space prior. There's lots of explanatory exposition that struck me as inauthentic.
Psh, i'd like to see you under those circumstances and not lose your fucking mind.You know a good way not to waste oxygen? Stop talking
All this talk about Bullock has made me ponder the best female performance in a Sci-Fi.
I think it might be Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio in The Abyss.
You know a good way not to waste oxygen? Stop talking
Ripley dude, WHAT
I think it might be Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio in The Abyss.
She's fantastic. But Mastrantonio is better.
What about worst female performance in a Hollywood sci-fi movie?
Because Foster in Elysium should be in the running
Nod to Jodie Foster.
Take that Sculli, you don't know if I have exquisite taste or what? It bothers you that I may just be dead on about a lot of things!
Mastrantonio > Foster in Contact.
The best female performance in a Sci-Fi movie is not in one of James Cameron's.All this talk about Bullock has made me ponder the best female performance in a Sci-Fi.
I think it might be Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio in The Abyss.
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?
I may have to revisit.
The best female performance in a Sci-Fi movie is not in one of James Cameron's.
Until you offer up a counter-argument, I don't see why not. Acting like Cameron's films don't offer up strong female performances is also very silly.
Saw this movie a few nights ago and it had me very stressed out and uncomfortable and now I hate space
not worth the $18 I spent too
This is exactly what I was thinking while watching the movie.Psh, i'd like to see you under those circumstances and not lose your fucking mind.
shit quoted the wrong post... ;o
anyways in response to the best female sci-fi performance
Sigourney Weaver in Alien.
In my opinion her performance was the best when it comes to a female lead.
Ridley Scott directed Alien
Whilst I may prefer Alien to Aliens, Weaver's performance in Aliens outclasses her performance in Scott's film tenfold.
Don't get why people are mad at Tyson's tweets. I found that and the nasa reviews more interesting than other opinions in this case since I was very interested in how the debris and orbit would actually react
And they all enjoyed it aside from their nitpicking (which is understandable considering how much they know about the field)
Best theater experience I've had since Jurassic park in 1993 as an 8 year old
TDK, Avatar and especially lotr had greater or equal first time reactions for me though. This is definitely among them
I'm not interested in movies being popular (or unpopular). I'm interested in them being intellectually sophisticated. I am fine if that requires a lower budget.
This does not mean I did not like the movie; as stated, I did. But "it's a good movie" does not mean it had no flaws. Very few films are so well made as to be practically above criticism, and this isn't one of them.
Ok I want to watch this movie, but I just know it is going to suck (my taste in movies).
I just can't see how it can be so "amazing". If it is visuals, I don't give a shit about that.
Is there really a catch when it comes to story, something mindblowing?
Please give me a reason to watch this.
BTW nospoilersbig
I was joking. I'd say the female performances in James Cameron's movies are some of the best.Until you offer up a counter-argument, I don't see why not. Acting like Cameron's films don't offer up strong female performances is also very silly.