Separate names with a comma.
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Discussion in 'GMD Social Forum' started by Manic Ferocity, May 4, 2007.
Who was saved by being un-shot? I'm blanking.
I thought Elizabeth Debicki's character was shot, and so they took her through the turnstile so she could be "un-shot" by a reverse bullet, or whatever. Which presumably means her body... healed? I don't know.
Oh right. I don't think she was being un-shot I believe they took her through the turnstile because the radiation from the inverted bullet spreads faster in the normal flow of time, so once they inverted her the radiation was able to be treated and the bullet wound was then able to heal itself like any other wound would.
Edit: Or maybe inverting the body makes the inverted bullet wound just a regular bullet wound?
Edit 2: From a 'Tenet explained' article; "Since it moves at the same speed either way, being in the path of the latter is just as bad, with the added side effect that the inverse radiation also infects the bullet wound."
I'm pretty sure that's what happened but I do need to watch it again, it was such a sensory overload.
As an aside, I just found out that Pattinson's character was modelled after Christopher Hitchens, wtf?
Jesus Christ, I got none of this (especially the radiation shit) from my viewing. I’ll have to watch it again at some point.
It's a double-edged sword I guess. On one hand it gives you a good reason to watch Tenet multiple times but on the other hand it means on some level Nolan failed to deliver a clear narrative and for a lot of people it came across cluttered.
Or I just didn't give it the attention it deserved. After Inception, I kinda lost faith in Nolan as a director whose work deserves real close attention, but maybe Tenet improves on closer inspection. The sound mixing was weird too, as I mentioned, and I probably missed some plot points because I just didn't hear them.
At any rate, I wouldn't be annoyed to watch it again. It's a very enjoyable film visually.
Tonight, double header..
Saw two awesome films recently: Orson Welles’ F for Fake and Park Chan-wook’s The Handmaiden.
I always think of Welles as taking himself very seriously, so it was really fun to see him poking fun at himself in Fake, while also offering a really playful and deconstructive take on the documentary genre. Would recommend for fans of Welles and meta-narrative shenanigans.
The Handmaiden was also fantastic, fucked up story but with the right amount of humor and poetic justice. Also didn’t see the twists and turns coming, and it made for a really fun watch.
Love the work of Park Chan -Wook, The Vengeance Trilogy is brilliant, dark, yet strangely beautiful, Thirst isn't too bad.
Feel like that one- take hallway fight in oldboy deserves a special mention, I haven't seen the Hollywood remake, and I doubt I will, they are rarely up to scratch
Yeah Spike Lee's remake was inferior. It just felt like a stale regurgitation. I need to see the rest of the Vengeance Trilogy, I've only seen Oldboy.
If you like at least 5 movies from 1977, feel free to join in on this.
I love The Handmaiden. I think it was #2 in my 2016 list.
As for F for Fake, what can I say. One of the very few movies I'd give 5 stars to, Welles' best, and so far ahead of it's time it's not funny.
Have you seen The Other Side of the Wind yet? If you haven't, suggest you get on it because it's a thematic companion to F for Fake.
Strange I'd never heard of this movie despite the star cast. As far as video-game style ultraviolence goes, this was one of the more entertaining I've seen. Yet another Groundhog Day premise but funny enough to overlook the stale ideas. Gibson is convincing again as the bad guy but doesn't get enough material to work with.
Very ahead of its time, as far as cinema goes. A few years before the movie came out, Hugh Kenner published a book called The Counterfeiters: An Historical Comedy, which unpacked all the assumptions we make about art (which also includes literature, for Kenner), including its connection to the artist/author. I have to imagine Welles stumbled across that book and was thinking of it when making F for Fake.
I have not. I will get on it--thanks!
Imo oldboys the best, but the others aren't bad,
Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance is a close second best imho.
Yeah I agree with that
This was simultaneously awesome and disappointing. The lengthy build up was great, setting up the dynamics of the small town. Reminded me of Rio Bravo, one of my favourite movies. And the eventual change of gears had the potential to be so great, but I can't help but be disappointed with the execution.
The climax just seemed incredibly rushed and in stark contrast to the meticulous build up. Like it was all foreplay and no sex. Too many elements not developed - Teresa is positioned as the main character yet has no involvement in the denouement. The doctor Domingas - her odd behaviour at the funeral is never explained. What was the reason for her apparent death wish in confronting Udo Kier's character at the end? The reformed gangster Pacote is given a proper backstory but he too has little involvement in how things unfold. As for the satire elements which are frequently talked up, beyond the blatantly obvious statement about Westerners (literally) preying on South Americans I'm not sure it had much to say, or that it did so particularly cleverly.