MovieChat Forums > avortac4 > Replies
avortac4's Replies
..but I would still rather rename 'Death Star' to something more congruent with the other names and more descriptive, as in 'Planet Destroyer', so now we'd have a movie aptly called 'Moon Skirmishes', with old, terrifying ships called 'Moon Destroyers', and this new, scary weapon called 'Planet Destroyer'.
Wouldn't that make a lot more sense?
I realize it wouldn't be as 'cool', and of course we're all so used to 'Star Wars', 'Death Star' and 'Star Destroyer' by now, it would sound weird, but you have to admit, it would make a heckuva lot more sense!
There have been people that took 'magical substances' that claim seriously and congruently that they absolutely were taken to a different world, different place, different family and possibly a different time, and they DID live there for 20 years or whatever, and then, and only then, returned back to 'normal reality', and that it was as real as anything they experience normally.
Now, people should, of course, take any 'drug user' ramblings with a lot more than just a grain of salt, but it has to boggle the mind a little bit - why are they so adamant at telling this kind of a lie, and why is it so common? Heck, even I have experienced some kind of reality/dimensional shift, when we were dumb teenagers and were trying all kinds of ways to 'get high', and someone figured out that if someone pushes your lungs hard enough, you lose consciousness, you 'faint' - but it's a different kind of experience from your normal fainting, and every individual it was done to, including me, experienced PROFOUND confusion for a few seconds when they 'came back', and watched a group of aliens laughing at them.
Only slowly they started remembering who they really were and realizing these aliens are actually their friends, laughing their buttockses off at the scared and confused expressions the 'experiencer' was making.
We can easily brush off this kind of stuff, but to me, it tells something about the reality beyond the mere physical boundaries, mere 'status quo' stuff. If I add every 'mystical' experience I have ever had, people here wouldn't even believe me, but it also crystallizes as a worldview of the Universe as something way more magical and interesting than our mundane everyday reality with our routines and everyday materialism.
So when nihilistic people try to suppress worldviews that actually know there's more to life than shadows in a cave, because it's experiencable, not just a theory, I don't really suffer fools gladly at that point.
Time travel is REAL, deal with it.
I guess it's going to take a lifechanging event for people to start realizing how magical, mystical and full of possibilities reality really is, and how narrow-minded, boxed-in and ignorant most 'limitation believers' are. Even Bruce Lee said something about having no limitation as limitation and so on. What's it going to take to open people's minds even to a possibility that they might have been wrong by clinging to outdated nihilistic dogma and belief system that only brings misery and war?
"The bet went to 80 grand each, sure "
No, it didn't. It was a 'double or nothing' situation, which means only ONE of them would've had to pay that kind of money. The 'nothing' in 'double or nothing' means if Judge wins, he pays 'nothing', which means he doesn't have to pay. That's the WHOLE POINT about the 'double or nothing', but I don't expect the coked-up hollyweird writers to realize that, of course..
Now, to answer the point itself. I really don't want to defend this piecemeal of a 'movie' (honestly, is this really a movie?), but what people say about Tys psychology sort of makes sense.
Anyone can excel when there's no pressure and they can put themselves into the 'zone', because success or failure doesn't matter.
When there's sudden pressure, and it suddenly MATTERS, it's a completely different.. ehh.. 'ball game', I suppose.
This means, you can be in Zen mode as long as you don't put any importance into it. Suddenly there's ego involved, money involved, winning is important, so you can't be in Zen mode anymore, which means, you can't excel the same way. It's very simple and easy to understand.
However, I think there's still bad writing somewhere, because Ty KNOWS this whole thing very well, so why would he be so confident all of the sudden that he can win when keeping score, playing for money and when the winning is important, to 'avenge' for his father and all that? Why would he ever let his ego write those checks he KNOWS he can't cash?
He voluntarily put himself into a situation that he had been avoiding all his life - competition, money, scorekeeping, win, ego... instead of just playing, being in Zen, being one with nature and the ball, and just letting the flow happen and win, lose, success, failure, score - those things don't even enter into it.
So the bad writing, in my opinion, isn't that Ty suddenly lost his skill, but that 1) Ty PUT(t) himself into that situation that he had been avoiding all this time though He 2) KNEW what it would mean.
"- Vacation"
Do you mean 'National Lampoon's Vacation'?
"- Three Amigos"
Do you mean 'Three Amigos!"?
"- Planes, Trains, and Automobiles"
Do you mean "Planes, Trains and Automobiles"? (I think this is one of those movies that have two names - one utilizing the ampersand, and the other using 'and' - the movie poster has 'and', but the movie itself, if I remember correctly, has an ampersand in the title.. 'Twelve Monkeys' suffers from this type of incongruency as well, if memory serves)
If you are going to praise some movies (most of the movies on your list are not particularly funny, some are classics), you could at least write their names correctly - just sayin'..
"Explaining a funny joke doesn't work. "
But explaining an unfunny joke works?
Of course explaining a joke works. It doesn't make you laugh, but it makes you UNDERSTAND why people laugh at it. It ruins the 'surprise' or 'funniness' of the joke, but it definitely works in helping people understand WHY it was funny. Jokes aren't always 'if you don't get it, you don't get it'.
For example, Ty making those weird sounds while golfing might be unfunny to people. However, you can explain that he's mimicking the silly sound effects they had in the old TV show 'Six Million Dollar Man', and after that explanation, the joke can be understood, even if it can't be laughed at (not that it's that funny to begin with).
At least the humor can be understood after the explanation - there are so many jokes like that, that ignorant youtubers just don't get, one example being the 'He never takes a second cup at home' in 'Airplane!', which is a reference to an old coffee commercial that used that kind of a gimmick - the husband can't drink more than one cup, because THAT brand of coffee tastes so bad, but when he is given OUR brand of coffee, he takes another cup.
See, how explaining a joke actuall DOES WORK? It's just that when the jokes are mostly 'meh' and not very funny, NOTHING can make them funny again, just like horses trying to assemble an egg that fell and broke. I will never understand why they thought horses could somehow fix a broken egg in that story, but maybe I could, if someone explained it to me.
Explaining a joke - regardless of whether you think it's funny or not - WORKS. Maybe not in 'it will then make you laugh', but at least in the sense of 'you will understand why others find it funny' a little better.
Of course 'double or nothing' means Judge didn't have to pay anything. That's what the 'nothing' means. So Rodney's character became a sudden robber.
Might as well have been feces, considering that a pool usually has some amount of URINE in it, which means the chocolate bar would also have that. People are also shedding skin, sweat, and saliva into the water, plus chlorine isn't very healthy, either. Then we can add that people jumped into the pool with their clothes on, which means all kinds of bacteria, dirt from the soles of their shoes and on and on.
That piece of fake turd would probably have been healthier to eat if it HAD been a real turd..
What I don't understand is that he was CHEATING, so he should've been disqualified, Rodney's team should've won a long time before they actually did.
Nothing any time traveler did in the past, actually changed the future at all.
They basically made sure the future would happen exactly as it did. It was too late to prevent anything, after the virus was already airborn. Killing the guy would not change anything after that happened.
The only thing they did was to gather data, samples, evidence, etc., so the future people can piece together what actually happened, so they can THEN try to create cures and immune system boosts and whatever they have to, to cope with the situation better and perhaps elevate humanity back to the surface eventually.
It's very simple.
Also, you ABSOLUTELY can change the future without changing the past. Future hasn't happened yet, so you have free reign to make any decisions about it. Past already happened, so you don't have access to changing it. I don't get what's difficult about this, it's all logical and simple.
Of course with time travel, you should be able to change the past, or it's basically just watching reality as a movie. However, in this movie's Universe, you can't change the present/future BY changing the past, you can only change the future the same way we normally would anyway - by making decisions in the present.
This movie utilizes the predestination paradox, and does it pretty darn well.
It's just sad that this is the only way writers can create even semi-plausible time-travel story that makes even some sense.
Everything considered, this movie makes a surprising amount of sense.
"We also know that he isn't a figment of James imagination, because Dr. Railley also sees him, and interacts with him when James isn't there."
Wrong.
First, it's 'Railly', not 'Railley'. Second, she does NOT interact with the 'voice', only the homeless bun that the 'voice' seemingly used. It's CLEARLY not the same personality/entity, even though it's the same body. That homeless guy doesn't know who James is, plus, his voice is different.
She interacts with the homeless guy, but she never interacts with THE 'voice' entity that James hears periodically throughout the movie.
Also, this movie plays with words a bit, as in 'Mon-KEY', 'Florida KEYs', and so on. It's funny, how everything that's on TV or radio is basically relevant to the story.. 'Time Tunnel' cartoon, 'kid in barn' and 'James Cole kidnapped a shrink', 'Florida KEYs' advertisements and so on.
For once, I'd like to see these things in movies; 1) Completely story/plot-irrelevant stuff when protagonist turns on a television or radio 2) People saying 'bye' or 'good bye' before ending a phone call 3) Drizzle or very light rain instead of heavy, pouring rain..
Exactly. Many things don't make sense in movies, but the virus-thing in this movie does.
"Omnicomprehensive", 'unscientific'.. you are grasping at straws here, when you have to resort to that sort of stuff.
Look, it's very simple;
1) The virus works just fine with animals, it JUST doesn't _KILL_ them. It works otherwise exactly as with humans.
2) Humans are just very VULNERABLE to that virus, so it kills humans very efficiently, animals have more resistance to its lethality, but they do become hosts and victims of the virus. It does probably kill the animals, too, but just much slower.
3) You should simplify your thinking from all that 'I have read 100 virus articles so I know how to use words like 'omnicomprehensive' to prove I am above you rookies'-nonsense; the virus works perfectly with every living creature, it's just that some living creatures have weaker resistance to it, so it's more lethal in some entities than others.
It's very simple and very realistic, you don't have to bring 'science' into it, viruses are not scientists, so they CAN'T, by definition, be 'scientific'. They're just something that happen to living creatures, that's all. No need to bring your white coats and laboratories into it.
People have already explained this, and you're still grasping at straws and making strawmen to attack, so I guess you might be resistant to the virus called 'logic and truth', but that just proves my point - some entities are more resistant than others, and THAT IS ALL you have to know.
That's a great point, OP!
It also makes me think that he should remember seeing the psychiatrist woman in the news as well, because those two stories were shown in the same newscast. It's impossible for him to remember the 'kid in the barn'-news, but NOT remember the 'James Cole Kidnapped the psychiatrist'-news.
The reason being, of course, that as a kid, he remembers seeing that 'beautiful face', it's like a memory burn that he still remembers as an adult. So, as an adult, he remembers the psychiatrist's FACE. But somehow he doesn't remember seeing that same face on television multiple times?
If he's so impressed with her face that he remembers it even as an adult, he should definitely remember seeing that same face in the news as well, right?
Yeah, this is an actually great point that I didn't even think about, applause to the OP!
I can't see any way out of it - it just simply makes no sense. He should absolutely remember seeing news with someone with his own name, and with that 'beautiful face' that is so burned into his memory. That same face should be burned into his memory from the news broadcasts as well as the airport scene, and thus, he should remember seeing HER in the news more than the kid in the barn, plus, he should be nostalgic about seeing all of the same news he also saw as a kid.
I mean, we get nostalgic watching a TV show episode we saw as a kid, so it would be the same kind of feeling for him.
Exactly. It's difficult to make a joke that laughs at racists, because some people can't undrstand it, and will confuse it with actual racism (exactly as happened here, the OP doesn't know what racism is).
You can flip the viewpoint and see that the black man has more (space?)balls than anyone else, because he isn't conforming to the norm of the bland, grey responses, but uses a more relatable vernacular of the common people, and is thus.. STICKING it to the (white) man!
You can see this scene from MANY viewpoints, what kind of a fool would only stick to the least plausible and most idiotic one? Look more broadly, Mel Brooks makes fun of anyone and everything, but although he has used 'shocking' scenes and 'forbidden' words, not even the most ardent 'black power' whitey-hater black cult leader could find Blazing Saddles racist against black people anyway.
On the other hand, racism against white, heterosexual men is probably completely OK, even when it's ACTUAL racism and real, especially when committed by 'minorities'... according to the OP's worldview, I bet.
On yet the other hand, the OP seeing racism where there is none is 100% as ridiculous as claiming Star Wars movies are racist against white people because stormtroopers wear white uniforms.
Well, there's 'self-defence' and there's self-defence. There's also such a thing as excessive self-defence - forgot the actual legal word for it, but you are NOT allowed to murder someone in acceptable self-defence.
I guess in USA, you can murder an intruder in your house (not that it's lawful, but at least it's legal), but that's about it. Unless the circumstances are extreme, you are not allowed to take someone's life in self-defence - your life is not more important than theirs in the eyes of the law.
"Psychiatry is like witchcraft."
Hey! I won't have that - stop insulting witchcraft!
At least witchcraft is based on reality, truth, nature and actually works. Of course, in the modern world, functional witchcraft is extremely rare to witness, but still.
Think back to Atlantis, ancient Egypt and their real, spiritual priests that knew what they were doing due to their training to handle all kinds of energies, lower and higher level spiritual abilities, temptations, super strong emotions and so on - that's what the initiation has always been about (not about some cult circle ritual invented by some idiots), that's why the pyramids are exactly the proportions they are and stand in the exact spots they do, to combine cosmic and planetary forces to protect the individual being initiated while their soul is outside of their body for extended periods of time.
That's why nothing rots in a pyramid built correctly at the correct place (around 2/3s from the ground), that's why it makes blades sharp and keeps them that way - it concentrates powerful energies to protect and nourish the body-energy system while the soul is away for extended period of time so the initiation can be done.
I know all of this is 'woosh' to this era's this planet's people, but someone has to tell the truth regardless.
So there's WAY more credence, history, truth, reality and actually effective power in witchcraft than psychiatry.
PLEASE stop insulting witchcraft!
I forgot to mention, Pam has a similar 'regular girl' charm as Barbara Feldon (Agent 99) in 'Get Smart'.
At first, she doesn't seem like anything special, but she comes off as very likable. As time goes on, her charm becomes more and more obvious, and starts to shine, and you start 'feeling it'.
Neither woman is exactly any kind of 'beauty queen' per se, but they are likable and charming enough to make them perefct for their roles, and also a bit of an object simps love to drool over (some things never change). However, even non-simps can appreciate the charm of these entities with a powerful TV presence.
Sometimes you don't need to be a beauty queen to have charm power, back in the day even ugly, older fat guys could be 'action heroes' (until Stallones, Schwartzeneggers and Van Dammes ruined it).
But the worst crime of that sentiment is, it goes against everything we were told about equality, and why it DOESN'T matter what someone's skin color is, their CHARACTER is what matters.
So shouldn't it just say 'Equality is good' or 'Everyone is valuable' or 'People's Character Matters' at least?
By elevating one group based on temporary body's qualities, you create a very dangerous thought. Think about someone living in a 'black body' (so to say), and being all about this whole 'blm' stuff. Then suddenly that body dies, this individual is reincarnated into a 'white body'. Now, it's the same, exact soul, but SUDDENLY they don't matter just because their body doesn't match the message anymore! WHy would anyone just stop mattering simply because they live in a different type of a body? It's insane.. it's like someone judging someone SOLELY based on what car they are inside of. If they step into another type of car, then suddenly they're celebrated? It MAKES NO SENSE!