*** ONE BATTLE AFTER ANOTHER *** (Leonardo DiCaprio, dir. Paul Thomas Anderson)

4,722 Views | 89 Replies | Last: 7 min ago by Lathspell
Quinn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm not getting involved in some culture fight, just providing some quick facts about the initial reviews while scrolling TexAgs.
DTP02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

What the hell are you talking about?

Again, you haven't even seen the movie yet.


I'm going by what the reviewers themselves have said about the movie, just as everyone else is here including yourself. Based on their own descriptions of the movie there's just a complete lack of self-awareness and empathy to not even acknowledge the timing of it.

To quote your own words about it:

Quote:

I mean... immigrants *are* being rounded up now in unprecedented ways, and there *are* very vocal members of our current government actively endorsing Christian Nationalism. So making a movie about what could happen if those things were left unchecked/taken to the extreme seems perfectly fine/plausible to me.


if that's what the movie is about, as multiple reviews have suggested and you yourself have guessed (without even seeing the movie!), then not acknowledging the 2000 pound elephant in the room of a very fresh politically motivated murder which has consumed the nation's attention at the same time is bizarre and speaks volumes.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The world does not revolve around Charlie Kirk and his murder. It was a horrible tragedy that has only made the country more divided, no doubt. We all feel for his family and agree that it was a senseless killing by a radicalized individual.

But you have no idea how radicalization is depicted in this movie.

To complain about a small number of Twitter reactions not addressing Kirk in their tweets, simply because you think the movie supports radicalization/violent revolutions/etc - again, without having seen it for yourself - is jumping the gun, to put it mildly. Especially if the movie ultimately makes DiCaprio's character out to be kind of dolt (which looks to be the case), leans toward conservatism in certain regards (as one reaction hinted at, which you're conveniently ignoring), etc.

You're asking for something wholly unreasonable, while engaging in an unreasonable act yourself (complaining about something you don't yet know the specifics of). Again, if the movie ultimately ends up justifying your complaints, complain about it at that point. At least wait to see if you're right or not first.
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I was honestly kind of neutral on this movie based on the trailer, but the positive reviews are getting my attention.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

The world does not revolve around Charlie Kirk and his murder. It was a horrible tragedy that has only made the country more divided, no doubt. We all feel for his family and agree that it was senseless killing by a radicalized individual.

But you have no idea how radicalization is depicted in this movie.

To complain about a small number of Twitter reactions not addressing Kirk in their tweets, simply because you think the movie supports radicalization - again, without having seen it for yourself - is jumping the gun, to put it mildly. Especially if the movie ultimately makes DiCaprio's character out to be kind of dolt (which looks to be the case), leans toward conservatism in certain regards (as one reaction hinted at, which you're conveniently ignoring), etc.

You're asking for something wholly unreasonable, while engaging in an unreasonable act yourself (complaining about something you don't yet know the specifics of).

Again, if the movie ultimately ends up justifying your complaints, complain about it at that point. At least wait to see if you're right or not first.

wasting your time
Leo choosing the movie AND it's by Paul Thomas Anderson should be enough to get anyone that actually likes movies to the theaters.
These clowns just live to cry about things they will never watch online.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't disagree with a single thing you just said.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
swimmerbabe11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
schmendeler said:

I was honestly kind of neutral on this movie based on the trailer, but the positive reviews are getting my attention.



swimmerbabe11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm still distracted by the pregnant lady with the machine gun pressed up against her belly, but I am really really really struggling to see how this film is connected to charlie kirk's death.
DTP02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
swimmerbabe11 said:

I'm still distracted by the pregnant lady with the machine gun pressed up against her belly, but I am really really really struggling to see how this film is connected to charlie kirk's death.


- Dude posts a bunch of reviews which summarize the movie as extremely political, one which will appeal to those in a "leftist bubble" (reviewer's word), and which has as plot points a villain who is a white Christian nationalist racist leading an army of the same, with our heroes being former revolutionaries who liberated immigration concentration camps. This is from the reviewers themselves.

- the movie doesn't have anything to do with Charlie Kirk's death, obviously. It was written and made years before.

- the reviews, however, describe the movie as this overly political film which depicts an extreme caricature of those on the right, and the reviews came out the same week right after Kirk's murder by a nutjob who was radicalized by extreme depictions of those on the right. To not even acknowledge that obliquely when reviewing a movie is just tone deaf as to the timing. Frankly I can't imagine the same type of critical oversight and lack of empathy if the pertinent worldviews of the movie and the critics and the murder victim were flipped. And if anyone is being honest with themselves, I don't think they could either.

- Kirk was a pretty moderate voice on the right whose trademark was engaging in civil discourse with ideological opposition. It takes a helluva lot of extremist propaganda to make someone think he's an evil Nazi whose murder is striking a blow for the cause. A movie that paints a future of concentration camps and white Christian nationalist racists controlling swaths of the country kinda fits with that, if that's what those movie depicts (again, this is suggested by the reviewers themselves)

I didn't come to this thread to find a movie to complain about, as the hypocritically narrow-minded poster above suggests. I came to this thread because I was interested in the movie based on the cast and the director, and the trailer didn't reveal enough for me to know what it's about.

The posted reviews themselves are where I got my opinions of what the critics think it's about. And they paint a consistent enough picture that one of the most consistently argumentative posters on this board himself even guessed at what it's about. And IF the critical descriptions themselves are accurate, then it's nuts to not even have a single critic mention that "hey, the timing of this film release is a little awkward."

But given the widespread celebration, at worst, and smug indifference of so many on the left to Kirk's murder by a radicalized leftist, perhaps it shouldn't be surprising that none had the self-awareness to draw that connection.

Anyway, I'm out on this thread and movie until someone I trust tells me it's not the extremely political caricature that a lot of the critics suggest. I have zero reason to believe the most active posters on this thread will even consider what I've said here, so I've wasted enough time on this.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
We're not considering what you've said here because we're ignorant, Charlie-Kirk-hating leftist *******s or whatever nonsense you're hinting at. We're not considering what you've said here BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE FOR YOURSELF YET, and because this is what people like you ALWAYS do on this board: ***** and moan about **** you haven't yet seen, based on the absolute worst, bad faith projections mired in politically-obsessed brain rot. Also, your over-generalizations of what critics have actually said are so incredibly broad and simply not 100% accurate either.

Once again, since it still doesn't seem to register with you: depiction is NOT endorsement. In other words, you have no idea what is and isn't being endorsed in this movie, played for sincerity, farce, what PTA is saying thematically, etc. And I don't either. Which is why I'm waiting until I see it with my own two eyes to give my option, something I've suggested multiple times now you do as well.

Regardless, the idea that a 97% RT score is coming from leftists only, which you seem to be implying, is insane.
Sea Speed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
He posted a well reasoned and polite response and you escalated to the next level with cursing and the Internet equivalent of yelling. Why? I would guess that is probably people's number one hang up with you as a poster, and not that you actually get in these arguments. There was absolutely no reason for the escalation in your response to the post DTP made.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Give me a break, dude.

It wasn't just one post, it was multiple posts in which he's argued the same talking points over and over, while refusing to acknowledge that actually seeing the movie for himself could change his entire point/outlook.

He's also implied numerous times that if we don't agree with him it's because of "smug indifference to Kirk's murder" and that basically all leftists reacting positively to the movie are pieces of ****, which is just as offensive/ridiculous as you claim I'm being.

He also called swimmerbabe11 a "hypocritically narrow-minded poster," which you conveniently had no issue with either.

In other words, spare me your highly biased pearl-clutching. Also, grow up, re: my use of "language." This isn't church, nor did I use "language" in a derogatory fashion toward him. It was simply for emphasis, considering I'm an adult/not in elementary school.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DiCaprio going on The Tonight Show for the first time in nearly 20 years, and now doing a podcast, something he has rarely done, if ever. Dude is going all out for this movie.
Quinn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Crazy to see him out promoting it like this.
swimmerbabe11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
woah am i a narrow minded hypocrite? cause I honestly was shocked that what seems to be a pretty typical dystopian plot is being connected to Kirk's assassination and I think it makes sense to give the critics some grace and say that didnt occur to them to make that leap either.

its just a stretch imo.
DTP02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
swimmerbabe11 said:

woah am i a narrow minded hypocrite? cause I honestly was shocked that what seems to be a pretty typical dystopian plot is being connected to Kirk's assassination and I think it makes sense to give the critics some grace and say that didnt occur to them to make that leap either.

its just a stretch imo.


I'm coming back on this thread for the last time specifically to address you. I didn't call you a narrow-minded hypocrite. Should have been obvious when I was responding directly to your question with the bulk of my post and referring separately to "the poster above" regarding the narrow-minded hypocrisy whose name I didn't recall at the time. Not obvious enough for TCTTS, who wrongly said I was calling you a hypocrite.

Looking back at it now, it was PatAg with the measured, thoughtful
response of

Quote:

These clowns just live to cry about things they will never watch online.


who I was referring to. Nothing I've said on the thread would justify PatAg's response at all. In fact I made it clear from the outset that I came to this thread with no preconceptions or even inkling that the film was political, and my views were only informed by the reviews posted in the thread. But PatAg in his/her own mind clearly considers themselves a bastion of open-minded tolerance, thus my description.
Cliff.Booth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That's par for the course with him, it's all he knows how to contribute.
Lathspell
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sea Speed said:

He posted a well reasoned and polite response and you escalated to the next level with cursing and the Internet equivalent of yelling. Why? I would guess that is probably people's number one hang up with you as a poster, and not that you actually get in these arguments. There was absolutely no reason for the escalation in your response to the post DTP made.

 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.