MovieChat Forums > avortac4 > Replies
avortac4's Replies
That scene perfectly underlines how little Wendy cares about Jack - even a worthless, throwaway coffee cup has more value to her than Jack or Jack's health. Also, it's perfectly illogical to use a location of precurement as the rationale for rejecting Jack's wish to have it.
However, two points:
1) It's not really a 'blink and you miss it'-moment (you forgot the 'it'-part), it's very easy to see, hear and remember.
2) You are MISquoting the movie, that is NOT what they say. Jack says, "Oh, coffee, great, thank you!" (underestimating Wendy's selfishness), and then Wendy replies "I got it down the hall".
Wendy never says 'no' or 'this'. Jack never mentions 'love', 'I' or 'cup'.
Why do people do this? Why do you misquote a movie, when you have had decades to learn the lines that you are quoting, and when it's so easy nowadays to re-check the line before talking about it? Why won't you spend 5 seconds with google, if nothing else?
If the line impressed you so much you want to share your thoughts about it, SURELY you can respect the line enough to AT LEAST write it correctly as it was said in the movie.
In any case, this scene is brilliant, because with just a couple of short lines and actions, SO MUCH is told - Wendy is only pretending to care, but is really selfish and callous, and the exact amount she cares about Jack, Jack's health or feelings, is pretty close to (if not actually) zero.
I mean, Wendy doesn't mind LOSING the coffee (she wastes it in a heartbeat without a second thought or regret), she just really doesn't want JACK to have it.
The thinking here of course is, if she's going to lose / waste the coffee anyway (not being able to enjoy it herself in any case), she might just as well give it to someone that appreciates it (Jack). But she doesn't, she rather no one have it than have Jack enjoy it.
This is one of the 'miracle shots' of this unique movie, really well done.
I remember reading about how they did it, and they pulled every trick in the book to make it in time; if memory serves, they used another actor for the hands immediately when the face is out of the frame, and still they barely made it in time.
I am sure they had to practice this a lot before getting it right.
It's amazingly done, and extremely effective. This is the type of stuff that creates real 'movie magic', as opposed to a computer rendering the frames for you.
Yeah, there are so many inconsistencies and things of this nature in this movie. Why are 'fat' and 'blood' these big blobs of 'matter' (cells, if you will), but whiskey is just.. whiskey? Why isn't whiskey also 'huge molecules/cell-type things'?
Also, if you can take whiskey into the pod, surely you can take oxygen as well with a similar (if not identical) method. Think if vacuum cleaners and such - moving air inbetween the molecule and the outside air should be feasible, if whiskey can be transported that easily.
Why is there even difference in pressures anyway? It's not like Tuck is going deep-sea fishing or into outer space, which would require pressurized oxygen.
If they really thought everything through, we probably didn't have a movie.
"Borat was definitely ONE OF the worst movies I have ever seen."
I don't know if I will ever be able to say that - I have never been able to fully watch this movie.
What happens to chickens normally on a daily basis is WAY more cruel. Meat industry could NOT be more cruel, if it tried.
So, how's your dinner? Unless you are a vegetarian/vegan, it's FULL OF HORRIBLE PAIN and in any case, based on vomit-inducing cruelty that's hidden from your eyes, though.
I thought the voice acting was a little emotionless, passionless and monotone all around, besides a few characters.
When I expected Wonder Woman to show audible emotions, it never happened - her 'sad' didn't sound very sad, her 'happy' didn't sound happy at all, only her 'angry' sounded a bit angry sometimes.
Her mother could also have delivered the ending arena speech with more happy and 'fun' voice, or at least feeling 'touched by the magnifigence' or something (these things are so difficult to explain).
Einstein, ingenious timing.. between my two parts of a message, you managed to squeeze in a synopsis of what I am trying to say.
No wonder you are a genius.
..so the awesome night-light-scenes would just look slower.
What would look more poignant or more impactful than this movie already shows? I mean, do we NEED more impactful, a stronger message/scenes/movie than this anyway?
Corporations still look the same from the outside, most of the factory work would look very similar, except parts of it might be done by robots now, and .. when you think about it, this movie still shows our modern world pretty well, despite different tech and clothing styles, fewer people and no arcades.
I think the people that used to go to arcades and other similar events, nowadays just stay home because of computers, video games, tablets, minicomputers (that people call phones), and so on. Perhaps old people are not working on those 'sightseeing' things anymore?
The world has become more 'globalized' or 'international' as well - you would see more 'diversity' in crowds all over the west, etc.
Perhaps this could be done in different countries, like Tōkyō instead of american cities, and the cruelty..I mean, meat industry could be shown a bit more in gross (but truthful) detail, and instead of the mad rush that was prevalent in 1982, 'smartphone zombies' could be shown to just sit and stare, or walk slowly and stare in their phones, etc..
I am not sure a modern version is really needed, or if this kind of movie would even work for the modern world, because how do you really show the 'online madness' that exists in so many platforms, protocols, games, boards, forums, etc.?
The world has changed too much - it might even LOOK more sane outwardly in a modern movie like this, although in truth, it's even more insane inwardly.
I see where you are coming from, but I am not sure if I agree.
I sort of agree, but I also disagree.
On one hand, this movie does SUCH excellent job of elevating our normal perspective to something larger and higher that we can directly observe the INSANITY and HORROR of what normal people are doing everyday, as a matter of fact, without questioning any of it at all.
It already exists, you can already get the point from the movie, then all you have to do is extrapolate from there, and maybe you don't even want to get to the true horror of 2020..
It's better to use your imagination as the rendering and graphics engine - as they say, imagination is the best GPU. Therefore, no modern version could quite do it justice anyway.
Also, judging from the 'sequels', it quickly became about SJW politics and the 'human story' and it stopped being this unbiased observer that doesn't take sides, but just shows things 'as is' without narration, without speaking, etc. I guess the temptation to put a narrator or speech into a movie is just too much, and this movie was an anomaly, that won't be repeated.
This movie is partially a work of genius, and you can't put genius in a bottle by just mimicking someone else's work. Any sequel would be flat and try too hard or not understand quite what the first movie did to be so brilliant, etc. It would probably fail and miss the mark, and it would have narrations and politics and SJW stuff, and everything like that - perhaps even skewed perspective and lies!
You can't repeat this movie's genius or perfection - the end result would be tainted.
However, having said ALL that..
..I am a bit intriqued as to what a modern version might look like. I suspect a lot of it wouldn't be drastically different - cars might be shaped differently, but mostly they still pollute, they still look the same from a high altitude, and the traffic hasn't gotten any better. It would probably be more boring, because more cars means less speed..
"..watching a sort of evolution progress"
More like 'everyday insanity of the masses and corporations'.
There's no evolution here, it's more like devolution, if one wants to use such a word. This describes 'everyday life' of people on this planet.
Any progress is more towards efficiency and better enslavement of the people than anything real or spiritual, so you'd be more accurate to call it 'regression'.
So, devolution-based regression that people call their lives - that's what you are watching. The thing is, some things, like how INSANE it all is, is easier to observe from a different perspective. Perhaps that's why E.T.s are so keenly able to see just how mad this planet and its systems and people are.
But worry not, it seems soon everyone will be microchipped and then independent thought can be eradicated by a simple algorhithm..
To me, people packing in huge numbers just to watch the circuses.. I mean, sports, is just insanity.
Why would a balanced human being that knows many interesting goals to pursue, creative avenues to express something beautiful, methods of silencing the mind and simply observing and receiving the Cosmos need to watch some people on a field brutalize each other for some plastic object?
I just can't understand the fascination. Surely even the simplest computer and video games are more intersting than just watching some strangers perform repetitive, boring acts of stupidity on TV or inside a stadium of some sort?
Sports.. I just don't get it. Reading a boring book seems way more stimulating than drunkenly staring at some guy run around in a field behind a ball or vágina-shaped object, trying to make it go into some pre-designed area so the 'team' can 'score'.
What the !@%#* do people see in sports?
".. as is the sight of workers making hot dogs"
You mean,
"..as is the insanity of workers making hot dogs"
No need to thank me.
This movie shows a lot of insanity, that's more easy to witness and experience as such when displayed at different speeds and angles than we normally observe it. It becomes more clear - this movie is really a 'CLARITY-ENHANCER' among other things.
"It isn't a 'message' film"
Wrong. This is definitely the MOST "message movie" I have ever seen!
How could you not see that? It's screaming its message so loud that to be any louder, it would have to have an actual frying pan hitting your actual face until you get it. And you say it has no message? How?
"it is an art film"
Examples of art:
- Toilet glued to wall
- Empty canvas called 'Untitled'
- Blue line on white background, also called 'Untitled'
- Garbage pile
- Chair
- Clapping in a room
- Pollock paintings
Still want to confuse 'beauty' and 'art'?
This movie may be many things, but I would never insult it by calling it 'art'!
More points about this Jamie's brother being innocent-thing.
Wouldn't he have ALIBI many times when the explosions happened? I mean, he must have been somewhere with other people at least sometimes when it happened. Remember how the cop went to talk to him, when he was busy working in the burger joint after the explosion of the gang garage (if I remember correctly)? That'd already be proof that he couldn't have driven that car.
The cops have also seen with their own eyes what the car has done, especially the 'sky burning in blue flame' bit. Would the cops really think this weak guy could somehow perform such an effect?
There's NO way the cops would believe this guy is guilty of the murders (if they can even be called that, since the murderer is a ghost, and thus not really a force courts can touch, and the method is 'car accident'), and there's even less of a way they could prove it, no matter what kind of car he drives now.
The cops can't prove how this kid manufactured such a car, where he bought the parts, there's no 'Earthly trail' of any kind to follow, no receipts, no engine manufacturers to talk to, no witnesses to this car even having been built, no corporate logo, etc.
The cops might be very interested in taking apart the car, and they may get it due to it being a suspected murder weapon, but they couldn't pin the crimes on the 'bro', and everything taken into account, would probably not even consider pursuing a case against him.
'No Man's Land' has definitely the 'smoothest' Charlie Sheen performance. I don't know how to estimate 'coolest', though.
He's a bit sedated and calm in this one, and like a 'drug addict' in 'Ferris Bueller's Day Off' - but he's absolutely SLICK in 'No Man's Land'.
I think 'No Man's Land' wins, he is able to show off a wide range of emotions and expressions while remaining smooth and relaxed most of the time (except a couple of scenes, maybe).
I thought you were going to talk about the Charlie Sheen performance, not just list a few things!
In any case, Charlie's performance here is different from almost any of his other roles ('The Wraith' being a possible exception).
He's so calm, relaxed, collected, smooooooooooooth and subtle. His acting performance here is really sublime!
He can be so over-the-top in so many other movies, that without this movie, it might be easy to forget just how incredibly SMOOTH he can be.
This is how you project self-confidence - not worrying about anything (visibly anyway), and not stressing about things, just trusting that things will work out. You almost never see Charlie Sheen like this in other movies.
There's also a Miami Vice episode (with Al Bundy's actor (Ed O'Neill)) that deals with this stuff, and it also ends tragically, though has a different sort of twist.
An undercover cop that gets used to the glittery 'easy life' wouldn't really want to go back to the crappy apartment/suburbian hellhole with a naggy bulldogmonster for a wife and driving a beat-up car, having to pay mortgages and watching TV as the only entertainment after a hard, life-endangering day at work.
Ed O'Neill pulls off a really believable performance in that episode, so good, in fact, that you ACTUALLY forget for a few seconds that it's Al Bundy. Now, that's impressive!
I think in this movie, the protagonist's saving grace (besides his young age and naivety), is his large, loving family. He had a lot to lose by giving himself to the dark side.
You mean, "wrist"?
Lumbergh is a scummy little passive-aggressive manipulator that uses every trick in the book to avoid having to ACTUALLY do his job like a proper leader should, directly, with responsibility, confidence and dominance. He's a short, dweeby, nerdy guy with nasal voice that no animal would follow as a pack leader.
(And by 'short', I don't mean his physical size, I mean his posture and demeanor - he does not project 'power' or 'confidence' - he doesn't STAND tall)
And you have to let him manipulate you, even while you know exactly what he's trying to say, but instead of respecting you and giving it to you straight, he curves and twirls and goes to all kinds of verbal acrobatics before basically passive-aggressively forcing you to do something. It's like psychologically and emotionally BEATING YOU DOWN every time he talks to you, while outwardly looking like he's a good guy, and 'not much of a jerk', like some poor saps here seem to think.
Without caffeine for a week now, I don't think I can be clearer at the moment.
umbergh uses these 'smoothing' phrases that become annoying, because they're not genuine, they're just learned tactic to repetitively manipulate the workers, especially into thinking Lumbergh is their friend or someone they can easily talk with, and thus more easily bend to his will.
The long 'yyeeeaah', is supposed to convey 'relaxedness' and bring a 'friendly atmosphere', and it is also a 'positive suggestion', if you are familiar with hypnosis, because the word 'yes' brings us into more positive mode than 'no'.
Then he doesn't say "You have to do this", he doesn't tell "This is your task for tomorrow", he doesn't negotiate, as in "Where can you fit this task in your schedule" or explain, as in "This needs to be done by thursday, because the company.."
He just expresses that HE (Lumbergh) needs something (.."for you to come in on saturday"), and then presents the order as if it's an option, with "so IF you can just go ahead and", which includes this softening phrase ("..go ahead and"), which sub-consciously implies that the 'going ahead' is the thing he wants you to do, and the addition to it is just something extra, so it must be easier and lighter task, almost an after-thought.
He also gives him a false authority by doing that, when talking about himself. "I am just going to go ahead and.." sounds like he's on some important mission sanctified by the corporate, and thus has authority and legitimacy of performing the following action. He has been given a mission, and now he is going to go forward, or 'ahead', by doing that action. It's psychologically effective, if very annoying as well.
Notice the word 'just', to belittle the signifigance of the task being done (if it's done by himself), and to belittle the difficulty of the task or unreasonableness of the request when it's done by someone else.