TCTTS said:

---

Lathspell said:

---

We're back to the "you will sit in the corner we give you and you will like it" argument, again.

We also all "hate" Hollywood. Let's forget the fact that most of us have spent our lives loving the movies we have grown up with and have affected us so much, over the years. We're going to forget that, before all this woke Hollywood BS, most of us were perfectly happy to just enjoy movies. Sure, some hard-line Christians would have issues with certain movies, based on the content, but that was a huge minority.

Then, Hollywood begins pushing an entire ideology that is completely antithetical to our worldviews. It is against everything that we stand for as Americans and human beings. So we comment on it. We are then accused of being politically obsessed.

Then we get over a decade of this hamfisted BS from Hollywood, and we are still told to stop making a big deal out of nothing. If we point any of it out, we are obviously just politically obsessed.

It comes down to one simple point. Our worldviews are nearly completely opposite. I literally just watched the clip from the Charlie Kirk show, today, with Tim Pool retelling the story of him confronting Jack Dorsey on Rogan. In that show, Dorsey was adamant that Twitter was not biased. To this point, Tim brought up the idea of misgendering being against their rules, which Dorsey didn't consider a biased rule. Tim then had to explain to him that when you have more than half the country who believes calling a man who thinks he's a woman "a woman" is misgendering, and the other side of the argument believes not calling that man "a woman" is misgendering, then obviously the rule is biased.

These are COMPLETELY opposite views on reality. Jack Dorsey believed his rules were not biased because he lived in that tech-world lefty bubble. The same can be said for these Hollywood types who think they are actually fair-minded or would be capable of recognizing "THE MESSAGE" in their art. They are completely incapable of seeing "wokism" in their art because they simply view it as the only moral worldview. It's not woke, it's the way everyone should see the world.

---

Except that I've said COUNTLESS times in this thread that this movie IS, indeed, woke. My caveat is that it's not endorsing VIOLENT woke-ism. There's a difference. I could not have made this distinction more clear over pages and pages of discourse.

I've also explained multiple times that it's not about me/people like me ignoring the woke elements in these movies. Of course there are woke elements in some of these movies. Rather, it's that the RESPONSE in these threads to the amount of wokeness is beyond overkill. For instance...

- HUNDREDS of posts by grown men RAGING about an all female Ghostbusters.

- HUNDREDS of posts by grown men RAGING about a black Little Mermaid.

- HUNDREDS of posts by grown men RAGING about a two-second same-sex kiss in Lightyear.

... among countless other examples, while posters like aTmAg and El Gallo Blanco and so many more actively try to turn the most innocuous threads into political screeds and crazed finger-waving.

Overall, there's just a certain foaming-at-the-mouth quality to the endless amount of complaining that DOMINATES seemingly every last thread. When, in truth, 90% of the content out there isn't woke at all. It's just not. Most blockbusters are not woke. Most dramas are not woke. Most comedies are not woke, etc, etc, etc. Are there woke blockbusters/dramas/comedies? YES. But based on the amount of *****ing and moaning on this board, one would think it was a never-ending firehose of woke content being spewed all over the pop culture landscape and that's simply not happening. Y'all just get SO ANGRY at what *is* out there, and make it sound like the world is ending or that Satan himself is in charge of every last release and it all just ultimately gets to be a little much - like the boy who cried wolf - never mind how annoying and derailing it is.

Now, I will absolutely cop to, for instance, Disney in particular going too far with the woke during the first Trump administration and beyond. Combined with #MeToo and Covid and George Floyd it all made for this perfect woke storm in response to Trump that reached a deranged fever pitch on both sides. But I think we can all agree now that the pendulum is OBVIOUSLY swinging back, that woke, indeed equals broke, etc. Disney and damn near everyone else has publicly vowed to dial it back... and they have. Are there still some echoes and stragglers in that regard? Yes. But good lord, can we just take it down a notch? The right clearly won the culture wars. Woke-ism, however, isn't just going to go away overnight. There's currently a death rattle, sure, but at least have some perspective here. This was a decade-long phase. Not a new normal.

---

TCTTS said:

---

Attack, attack, attack.

I respond in kind.

Mock, mock, mock.

I respond in kind.

Lengthy, spiteful diatribe.

I respond with a lengthy, spiteful diatribe in defense.

"TCTSRQ is nuts." (10 stars from the same old dopes).

It's like clockwork around here.

Get a new bit.

---

Narcissism means never having to take responsibility for your actions. Prime example right here.

Unhinged, like all his kind.

He has crashed out.

isnt there a forum that already exists for this thread?
This forum is for talking about entertainment.

Seriously. Find another thread or go post a Facebook comment on an AI post about Bad Bunny

We almost left 3 different times during the first hour of this movie tonight. Stuck it out, and now upset that we didn't leave.

I just got out of this movie, having seen 0.0 seconds of previews, promos, info, of any sort of information about it.

If I had watched this on Netflix, I would have quit probably halfway through or so. I'm glad I stayed for a lot of the artistic and movie-making merits of how it was shot. Telephoto lenses of increasing focal lengths on steadicam rigs 6" off the road was absolutely spellbinding, and I could watch that 2-3 minutes on a loop forever.

DiCaprio did fantastic. Chase Infiniti is going to be a legit star for a long time.

I'll definitely agree with a bunch of others on this thread who took the opening 1/3 to be the glorification of antifa-style violence. Certainly that their battle cries echo verbatim what's being shouted on bullhorns in "NO KINGS" marches across Texas, and their smaller skirmish trash talk is straight out of Portland protestors throwing stuff at the ICE facility. The "you go girl!"-iness of most of the opening scene between Perfidia and Lockjaw. The cinematography of the celebratory fireworks during the immigration center breakout (those otherwise served zero legitimate purpose in that operation). But the real subtext overwhelming suggesting that narrative, for me, was in how the scenes were shot, how the cameras framed the revolutionaries, sometimes how they were lit, and overwhelmingly how the score and soundtrack portrayed their cause - those all presented the revolution as a flawed but heroic movement for the world.

Saying that this movie *doesn't* romanticize this because these characters all get it in the end... my counter to that position would be that the ways that each member meets their end also reinforces that the revolutionary side is the only just one. It's a character getting headshotted from behind as they flee from an off-camera cop. It's extrajudicial killings of most. It's police cowardice in the ways they eliminated others. So them meeting their end doesn't firmly imply that their actions were incorrect - it actually aggrandizes the current "ACAB" narrative against their political opponents.

Obviously the writers and director went out of their way to make Perfidia unredeemable for most of the film. If she was even mildly sympathetic in any way the knee-jerk reactions against the movie would have been too severe to hand-wave away.

Anyway, I'm not a cinema expert so I'm sure my opinions are """wrong""", but I'm saying the movie is the reason why the movie itself is drawing this kind of criticism. And I've only seen it once while trying to pay attention to everything going on at the same time, so I don't have concrete screenshots or timestamps of the specific instances I mentioned.

Other than a few primo moments, this movie will largely be a forgettable one for me.

Movie was a big ball of "meh"

I've seen all of PTA's films and will continue seeing anything he puts out, have always felt even if not immensely enjoyable they are always interesting and feel unique.


I have to admit I actively disliked One Battle After Another, I might put it over Inherent Vice but I'd have to watch both again to really decide which is at the bottom of PTA's filmography (for me).


I was tired when I saw it Friday night, and always have high expectation for this director's films, so maybe both influenced my opinion. But I feel like I'm making excuses for the movie, which I truly didn't like and even looked at my watch multiple times hoping the end was near.

Enjoyed the daughter character/actress, benicio del toro always fun to watch, scenes with daughter's friends offered some surprisingly rare laughs in the movie. As an old SNL fan it was interesting to see the director use Jim Downey in a second film.

This film bombed for very obvious reasons. Oh well.

I loved the movie and am not rooting for it to fail by any means, but this seems like a positive headline that kind of hides the lead, no?

It's only made $42 million domestic...on a $175 million budget. And yes, its at $100 million worldwide, but doesn't the studio get WAY less of the global box office money? To break even, doesn't it have to do something like $350 million domestically? So if they really want to use global box office to mitigate that, isn't that number even higher?

The headline should be "Studios need to make movies on the cheap!". If this was an $80 million production (as we all have previously said it LOOKS like), then I would be much more optimistic that this will be profitable. And I don't think the Oscar bump is really notable anymore. It may be for a movie that had a $20-$30 million budget, but its not really going to make a dent in something like this, IMHO. The market knows about this movie. If they choose not to see it now, awards nominations aren't going to convince them. The general audiences care less and less about that every year.

If anything, Warner Bros. is just going to write this off as essentially paying $100+million for a best picture Oscar. It seems likely right now, but that could change if some of these other movies coming hit right (looking at Hamnet in particular, a very popular book and a movie that probably has a budget of $50 million or less).

I've seen a lot of people in reviews saying "its 2hr 45 minute runtime but it doesnt feel like it"
I would disagree, I found myself checking the clock a handful of times.
normally runtime doesnt bother me, either.

TCTTS said:

---

I'm on the record as saying this movie cost way too much, Warner Bros shouldn't have never agreed to such a high budget, etc. Totally in agreement there.

That said, $175M is on the super-high/crazy end of estimates. There's just absolutely no way it cost that much. I'd say it's closer to the $130M-$150M range that's being more commonly reported. So, if you take the box office rule of thumb at face value, yes, it would take anywhere from $260M to $300M to break even. But a few more weeks in theaters, followed by months of hype/promotion on digital (the entire holiday season all the way through the end of March, post-Oscars), plus Blu-ray sales and what it'll make on cable/streaming/flights/hotels/etc, it could easily reach that $260M number if not more.

Either way, my contention was with the ridiculous "bombed for obvious reasons" wording. For a PTA-directed movie to do $175M+ at the box office is a minor miracle in and of itself. Throw in numerous Oscar nominations/wins (and what that will do for its non-theatrical numbers), in no way is this thing a "bomb."

---

You're forgetting the $70M marketing budget on top of the $130-150M production budget

Everything I've read says it's not going to break even. Who cares. It's their money, not ours.

Still can't decide if I care enough about this movie to watch it in the theatres. The buzz was enormous, but like often happens with movies that get enormous buzz, and over-the-top headlines from the previews....it ends up with mixed reviews from the audience. And almost always, I come away from those type of movies thinking half of the good reviews are from people who just think they're supposed to like it.

My neighbor, who has similar opinions as me, about movies, said 'I've never watched a movie, that liked to sniff it's own farts more than this one'.

That made me chuckle, and from the trailers, I get the sense he's right.

But that's just the kind of movie that the Academy loves to award Best Picture to!