Films Recently Watched

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:27 PM, zaphod said:

In the first book the teams didn’t die, they reappeared in different places outside the zone or whatever it’s called. it’s basically just stalker right?

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:27 PM, zaphod said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 1:15 AM, auxien said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 12:53 AM, THIS IS MICHAEL JACKSON said:

 

  On 4/3/2018 at 3:50 PM, goDel said:

color me stupid. i don't think that'd be an argument to not go back. on contrary. they lost sense of time. and they were aware of it. so why venture forward? doesn't make sense to me. and it doesn't make sense as an argument to not go back. again, color me stupid. if you can explain, i'm all ears.

  Reveal hidden contents

• 639
• 00:56:33,181 --> 00:56:34,224
• We have to go back.
•  
• 640
• 00:56:34,808 --> 00:56:37,060
• - We have to go back now.
• - She's right.
•  
• 641
• 00:56:37,311 --> 00:56:39,062
• Right? In what sense?
•  
• 642
• 00:56:39,146 --> 00:56:40,606
• We've been attacked twice.
•  
• 643
• 00:56:40,856 --> 00:56:42,733
• We lost one of our own.
•  
• 644
• 00:56:42,816 --> 00:56:45,944
• We have evidence the previous team
• went nuts and chopped each other up.
•  
• 645
• 00:56:46,028 --> 00:56:48,447
• I really don't know how much more right
• she has to be.
•  
• 646
• 00:56:48,530 --> 00:56:50,157
• We haven't reached the lighthouse.
•  
• 647
• 00:56:50,240 --> 00:56:53,160
• We still don't understand the cause
• or the nature of the Shimmer.
•  
• 648
• 00:56:53,243 --> 00:56:55,704
• We have data, observations, photographs.
• She has hella footage.
•  
• 649
• 00:56:55,787 --> 00:56:59,499
• All of which makes the phenomenon
• less explicable, not more.
•  
• 650
• 00:57:01,960 --> 00:57:03,754
• I'm gonna get to the lighthouse,
•  
• 651
• 00:57:03,837 --> 00:57:05,756
• and I'm fine going on my own.
•  
• 652
• 00:57:05,839 --> 00:57:10,093
• You just need to decide...
• whether you're coming with me or not.
•  
• 653
• 00:57:22,230 --> 00:57:24,316
• It's like she hasn't noticed
• that Sheppard is dead.
•  
• 654
• 00:57:24,399 --> 00:57:25,567
• She's crazy.
•  
• 655
• 00:57:25,776 --> 00:57:27,569
• She's a crazy old bitch.
•  
• 656
• 00:57:28,737 --> 00:57:31,281
• You know,
• and thanks for the fucking backup, Lena.
•  
• 657
• 00:57:32,574 --> 00:57:34,743
• - I didn't realize there were sides.
• - Yeah.
•  
• 658
• 00:57:35,118 --> 00:57:36,078
• Yeah, there are sides.
•  
• 659
• 00:57:37,371 --> 00:57:40,207
• Okay, then I agree with you.
• We should go back.
•  
• 660
• 00:57:41,083 --> 00:57:43,126
• Good. Okay, great. There we go. Okay?
•  
• 661
• 00:57:43,210 --> 00:57:45,504
• - So the three of us can...
• - Hold on a minute.
•  
• 662
• 00:57:45,587 --> 00:57:46,964
• We should go back, yes.
•  
• 663
• 00:57:47,047 --> 00:57:49,216
• But it took us, what,
• six days to get here?
•  
• 664
• 00:57:49,591 --> 00:57:51,927
• And the coast is two days away.
•  
• 665
• 00:57:52,928 --> 00:57:55,347
• And as Sheppard said...
•  
• 666
• 00:57:56,348 --> 00:57:59,726
• when we get to the coast,
• we can follow it until the perimeter wall.
•  
• 667
• 00:58:00,185 --> 00:58:01,937
• You're saying we get out
• by going deeper?
•  
• 668
• 00:58:02,688 --> 00:58:04,690
• - Yeah, if you like, yeah.
• - "Like"?
•  
• 669
• 00:58:05,065 --> 00:58:07,693
• No, I don't fucking "like."
•  
• 670
• 00:58:12,155 --> 00:58:14,783
• This isn't some bullshit tactic
• to get us to the lighthouse, is it?
•  
• 671
• 00:58:14,866 --> 00:58:17,202
• This is not about the lighthouse, okay?
•  
• 672
• 00:58:17,995 --> 00:58:20,038
• I believe that the coast
• is the best route out.
•  
• 673
• 00:58:24,835 --> 00:58:25,669
• Okay?
•  
• 674
• 00:58:39,224 --> 00:58:40,225
• You lied to them.
•  
• 675
• 00:58:43,645 --> 00:58:45,689
• I didn't know what going back meant.
•  
• 676
• 00:58:46,398 --> 00:58:48,859
• Why it would be safer than going forward.
•  
• 677
• 00:58:50,110 --> 00:58:53,780
• You didn't know, but you made
• a decision to continue as if you did.
•  
• 678
• 00:58:53,947 --> 00:58:55,282
• Ventress made the decision.
•  
• 679
• 00:58:55,365 --> 00:58:58,160
• Ventress had cancer.
• She was never coming back.
•  
• 680
• 00:58:59,494 --> 00:59:00,829
• You knew she was sick.
•  
• 681
• 00:59:01,747 --> 00:59:02,664
• I had guessed.
•  
• 682
• 00:59:06,084 --> 00:59:07,711
• And you wanted to continue.
•  
• 683
• 00:59:09,963 --> 00:59:10,797
• Yes.
•  
• 684
• 00:59:12,174 --> 00:59:13,008
• I did.

More in reply to goDel: every team that had gone before all died, except her 'husband' that came back, obviously very much not in an okay state. I forget how many teams they stated/implied in the movie or in the book, but it was a significant amount in both iirc. You don't sign up for a mission like that expecting to all come back alive. You might hope, but if teams of trained soldiers had gone in before, what makes you think you're going to stand a chance against whatever it is in there? The premise is that taking a mission like that at all is a deathwish. I thought that was pretty obvious.

In the first book the teams didn’t die, they reappeared in different places outside the zone or whatever it’s called. it’s basically just stalker right?

Regardless though. The idea of the mission was never supposed to be about never coming back. Sure, there was a risk involved which required a certain kind of character for people to enter. But sending people in with the intention of none of them coming out (ignoring the book for a sec) was never a goal. Goal was to find out what was going on. (hence the interview with the biologist!) And in order to do so, people simply had to come back out again.

So I disagree with your premise. At best it's about the likelihood of not coming out and the members of the team not being afraid of death.

But the intention of going in, was definitely to come back out again. (Obviously! Otherwise, what's the point of going in?) Unless you go into specific motivations of, say, the teamleader with metastatic cancer. But that's a specific personal intention unknown to the others within the story. Which obviously is different to the formal intention behind the mission at the time of the team entering.

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:28 PM, ignatius said:

watched "the Killing of a sacred deer" and it's a pretty weird intense creep fest. like awkward people doing horror autism.

Hahahaha! Spot on!

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:41 PM, THIS IS MICHAEL JACKSON said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:27 PM, zaphod said:

In the first book the teams didn’t die, they reappeared in different places outside the zone or whatever it’s called. it’s basically just stalker right?

does that really happens in stalker? i must have watched it 2 times and i couldn't make out nothing out of it, apart from the atmospheric experience... when people praise the movie it just makes me feel dumb... lol maybe it's a good time to watch it one more time...

Heh I don’t remember if anything happens in stalker but they’re definitely similar premises.

Columbus - a nice little movie made by a korean who loves ozu. Story and acting are decent but the frame composition is very nice, but it's pretty easy because all the modern architecture in columbus indiana is incredible.

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:56 PM, Squee said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:28 PM, ignatius said:

watched "the Killing of a sacred deer" and it's a pretty weird intense creep fest. like awkward people doing horror autism.

Hahahaha! Spot on!

 

that movie is awesome but i had to google lots of things because the whole story is actual a greek tragedy by Euripides's Iphigenia, otherwise it doesnt make any sense.

A24 are distributing and pushing those kind if movies check here for more weirdness.

https://a24films.com/

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:41 PM, THIS IS MICHAEL JACKSON said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:27 PM, zaphod said:

In the first book the teams didn’t die, they reappeared in different places outside the zone or whatever it’s called. it’s basically just stalker right?

does that really happens in stalker? i must have watched it 2 times and i couldn't make out nothing out of it, apart from the atmospheric experience... when people praise the movie it just makes me feel dumb... lol maybe it's a good time to watch it one more time...

 

to be an elitist, uber-pretentious cunt, Stalker is fuck all like Annihilation & while the comparison might appear fair enough on one level, on another its absurd

one is a metaphysical confrontation with the eternal invisibly visible mystery of this universe & our unfathomable existence in it, all done on a minuscule budget, the other is a solid enough bio-horror

however, the thing that stuck w/Annihilation was that segment with the thing melded with the dying scream, that was fuckin creepy, not many recent productions have leveled that degree of the heebie jeebies to the extent it made me put the light on taking a piss, Stalker didnt manage that

  On 4/5/2018 at 11:23 PM, Kavinsky said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:56 PM, Squee said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:28 PM, ignatius said:

watched "the Killing of a sacred deer" and it's a pretty weird intense creep fest. like awkward people doing horror autism.

Hahahaha! Spot on!

that movie is awesome but i had to google lots of things because the whole story is actual a greek tragedy by Euripides's Iphigenia, otherwise it doesnt make any sense.

 

A24 are distributing and pushing those kind if movies check here for more weirdness.

https://a24films.com/

By the way, You Were Never Really Here is amazing. Best movie I’ve seen all year

have yet to see a better depiction of PTSD & the story is tone perfect, best film seen for a long while, zero fat on it, tight & cohesive, came out of the cinema blinking in a frazzled mood

Morvern Callar is another Lynne Ramsay collectable worth the watch if folks havent

  On 4/5/2018 at 11:38 PM, cwmbrancity said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:41 PM, THIS IS MICHAEL JACKSON said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:27 PM, zaphod said:

In the first book the teams didn’t die, they reappeared in different places outside the zone or whatever it’s called. it’s basically just stalker right?

does that really happens in stalker? i must have watched it 2 times and i couldn't make out nothing out of it, apart from the atmospheric experience... when people praise the movie it just makes me feel dumb... lol maybe it's a good time to watch it one more time...

 

 

to be an elitist, uber-pretentious cunt, Stalker is fuck all like Annihilation & while the comparison might appear fair enough on one level, on another its absurd

 

one is a metaphysical confrontation with the eternal invisibly visible mystery of this universe & our unfathomable existence in it, all done on a minuscule budget, the other is a solid enough bio-horror

 

however, the thing that stuck w/Annihilation was that segment with the thing melded with the dying scream, that was fuckin creepy, not many recent productions have leveled that degree of the heebie jeebies to the extent it made me put the light on taking a piss, Stalker didnt manage that

the comparison is fine but you are definitely a pretentious cunt

  On 4/6/2018 at 12:06 AM, zaphod said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 11:38 PM, cwmbrancity said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:41 PM, THIS IS MICHAEL JACKSON said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:27 PM, zaphod said:

In the first book the teams didn’t die, they reappeared in different places outside the zone or whatever it’s called. it’s basically just stalker right?

does that really happens in stalker? i must have watched it 2 times and i couldn't make out nothing out of it, apart from the atmospheric experience... when people praise the movie it just makes me feel dumb... lol maybe it's a good time to watch it one more time...

 

 

to be an elitist, uber-pretentious cunt, Stalker is fuck all like Annihilation & while the comparison might appear fair enough on one level, on another its absurd

 

one is a metaphysical confrontation with the eternal invisibly visible mystery of this universe & our unfathomable existence in it, all done on a minuscule budget, the other is a solid enough bio-horror

 

however, the thing that stuck w/Annihilation was that segment with the thing melded with the dying scream, that was fuckin creepy, not many recent productions have leveled that degree of the heebie jeebies to the extent it made me put the light on taking a piss, Stalker didnt manage that

the comparison is fine but you are definitely a pretentious cunt

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 11:51 PM, Squee said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 11:23 PM, Kavinsky said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:56 PM, Squee said:

 

  On 4/5/2018 at 10:28 PM, ignatius said:

watched "the Killing of a sacred deer" and it's a pretty weird intense creep fest. like awkward people doing horror autism.

Hahahaha! Spot on!

 

that movie is awesome but i had to google lots of things because the whole story is actual a greek tragedy by Euripides's Iphigenia, otherwise it doesnt make any sense.

 

A24 are distributing and pushing those kind if movies check here for more weirdness.

https://a24films.com/

 

They put out the best movies

 

  On 4/6/2018 at 12:01 AM, cwmbrancity said:

have yet to see a better depiction of PTSD & the story is tone perfect, best film seen for a long while, zero fat on it, tight & cohesive, came out of the cinema blinking in a frazzled mood

 

Morvern Callar is another Lynne Ramsay collectable worth the watch if folks havent

Ratcatcher first, I say!

Rewatched Annihilation, it's not as good as I remembered, but the effects actually look decent now that the encode isn't fucked. The last bit with the bass farts and contemporary dance sequence is still great.

  On 3/14/2018 at 7:21 PM, Gocab said:

Anyway, I'm pretty sure the fault with the visuals lies within the budget, and not because the people involved thought this was their very finest work.

i myself never looked at a film's budget before, didn't really have a clue about what's considered low budget or high budget... but this got me curious and so i went to check it out and annihilation budget was around $55 million which, i think, and correct me if i'm wrong, takes it out of the low budget window... that compared with garland's previous movie ex machina is around 3.5 times more, so i don't think the budget here was the problem...

i even compared its budget with most of the films on A24 and it's one of the most expensive...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A24_(company)

Well then that means it's supposed to look like that and MAYBE YOU JUST DONT GETTIT :^)

fuck u spi, go play god in your elitist chat room!!! 

i mean, guys c'mon, twasn't that cheap, 10 million less than the matrix, 6 million more than chappie...

Just a detail: have these budgets been corrected in any sense?

A 1999 budget of $65mln is not comparable to a 2018 budget of $55mln. That's a roughly 20 years difference! If you correct for inflation that 1999 budget might be multiplied by two, to be able to compare it to a 2018 budget.

  On 4/6/2018 at 1:28 PM, goDel said:

Just a detail: have these budgets been corrected in any sense?

 

A 1999 budget of $65mln is not comparable to a 2018 budget of $55mln. That's a roughly 20 years difference! If you correct for inflation that 1999 budget might be multiplied by two, to be able to compare it to a 2018 budget.

yeah finance is not my forte... i thought that might not be comparable... but hey there's chapie that wasn't that long ago... and ex machina...

  On 4/6/2018 at 12:29 PM, THIS IS MICHAEL JACKSON said:

fuck u spi, go play god in your elitist chat room!!! 

  Reveal hidden contents

 :^)

 

 

i mean, guys c'mon, twasn't that cheap, 10 million less than the matrix, 6 million more than chappie...

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Untitled.png

 

why do you always post pics twice like that?

  On 4/6/2018 at 2:14 PM, span said:

why do you always post pics twice like that?

to make you think about it...

beautiful...   btw

thank

  On 4/6/2018 at 1:46 PM, THIS IS MICHAEL JACKSON said:

 

  On 4/6/2018 at 1:28 PM, goDel said:

Just a detail: have these budgets been corrected in any sense?

 

A 1999 budget of $65mln is not comparable to a 2018 budget of $55mln. That's a roughly 20 years difference! If you correct for inflation that 1999 budget might be multiplied by two, to be able to compare it to a 2018 budget.

yeah finance is not my forte... i thought that might not be comparable... but hey there's chapie that wasn't that long ago... and ex machina...

 

good luck with trying to get 20 years old software to work on current machines. ;)

in the pics you've posted there's also a "inflation corrected domestic box office" btw. if you compare that to "domestic box office" you get a good idea of the impact of the correction. if you do a "inflation corrected dom box office" / "dom box office" and use this to multiply the movies budget, you've got an inflation corrected budget.