Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Oscars

EEAAA started off with some nice ideas but I was bored by the end. Too much relentless action for my tastes. And it didn't actually make a whole lot of sense. I can imagine whichever physicist they had as a consultant getting rather frustrated, and I felt like I'd been a bit misled by the end because it's not really about a multiverse at all.
You're right, it isn't about a multiverse.

It's about the life not lived. It's about regret and missed opportunities and existential angst. It's about cultural displacement and the impossible situation of being between what was and what is. It's about having children then losing them precisely because you gave them the freedom they now want to exercise.

It's about a lot of different things, but it isn't about a multiverse.
 
You're right, it isn't about a multiverse.

It's about the life not lived. It's about regret and missed opportunities and existential angst. It's about cultural displacement and the impossible situation of being between what was and what is. It's about having children then losing them precisely because you gave them the freedom they now want to exercise.

It's about a lot of different things, but it isn't about a multiverse.
to me, the multiverse depicted is everything that happens inside a (neurodivergent/ADHD) person’s head at any given moments. Let’s call it the neuroverse instead.
 
Just sound?
Was such a massive hit I’d have expected more.
They gave it a big mention. A pat on the back for (post Covid) restarting of 'theatre viewing' of films (over TV) along with um Avatar? I think.

Then just the one nod as it is just a big commercial ball of corporate guff (in a good way). Movie by numbers.
 
I have probably a minority opinion on a few Nolan films. I loved Inception as well. It was like repeatedly coming out of a k-hole.

Tenet was dreadful, though. Really boring action sequences.
Inception was tight. Super tight.

Tenet had potential and was train wreck.
 
EEAAA started off with some nice ideas but I was bored by the end. Too much relentless action for my tastes. And it didn't actually make a whole lot of sense. I can imagine whichever physicist they had as a consultant getting rather frustrated, and I felt like I'd been a bit misled by the end because it's not really about a multiverse at all.

I really liked its depiction of Chinese culture and manners. That was probably the strongest aspect of it. The Sci-Fi wasn't Sci enough for me.

I don't think it was supposed to be sci fi. It was an absurdist fantasy.

It wasn't perfect but it had enough about it that was both new and good to put it miles ahead of most best picture winners.
 
I haven't seen the Whale and I have no interest in watching it because Aronofsky is a godawful bore but there is no way Brendan Fraser's performance was as good as Colin Farrell's in Banshees.
 
why did we have to travel to another galaxy to find a habitable planet? probably have billions of them right here in the milky way...

Galactic LTN. Only allowed straight in and out on the trunk road on odd-numbered centuries.
 
Last edited:
Galactic LTN. Only allowed straight in and out on the truck road on odd-numbered centuries.

Standard 15 light year neighbourhood. They've put up gates so you're not allowed past Betelgeuse unless you're in an electric spaceship.
 
I haven't seen the Whale and I have no interest in watching it because Aronofsky is a godawful bore but there is no way Brendan Fraser's performance was as good as Colin Farrell's in Banshees.
I doubt I’ll bother watching it, having read this article and blog by Lindy West:

West’s film reviews are thoughtful, funny and wise - her takedown of Sex & The City was masterful and I have no doubt she is righteous in her condemnation here
 
Science-fiction is boring when it gets too detailed about exactly how it’s all supposed to work

The correct format for hard sci-fi is the novel.

With movies you can do fantastical nonsense as long as the world has some internal rules and you don't just do some J.J. Abrams shit.
 
The correct format for hard sci-fi is the novel.

With movies you can do fantastical nonsense as long as the world has some internal rules and you don't just do some J.J. Abrams shit.
I don’t even care that much about internal ‘rules’ - only nerds tend to notice such rules. Would rather just be swept along my the imaginations of those who have created that world
 
Just found this from the 1999 Oscars; Robin Williams performing best original song nominee 'Blame Canada' which was, appallingly, beaten to the gong by Phil fucking Collins.

 
I don’t even care that much about internal ‘rules’ - only nerds tend to notice such rules. Would rather just be swept along my the imaginations of those who have created that world

You say that, but usually what is meant is that there’s some very bad storytelling going on.
 
Verisimilitude is crucial in storytelling. It’s the narrative version of “fact” — the way that we feel something is “real”. So I’d say that it’s not so much that we need internal rules to be obeyed, exactly. Just that we need verisimilitude. But the latter is hard to achieve if the former is broken.
 
He also thanked his Goonies co-star, Jeff Cohen, who played Chunk, but who is now a hotshot Hollywood lawyer and who represented Quan when he was negotiating his contract to play Waymond in the film

When I read that Cohen was a Hollywood lawyer, I pictured him looking and dressing like an adult version of Chunk. I was wrong. :D

jeffcohen.png
 
No-one's actually explained how EEAAW offends against science.

This should not be read as an invitation, however.
I shall resist.

I do accept all the comments that it's not about that really. I think I was a bit mis sold the film and am probably judging it unfairly.

Still think there was too much action.
 
Back
Top Bottom