News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Francis Ford Coppola’s $100M Dollar Bet by pdpi on Monday February 21, 2022 @03:01AM (#30413076)
Every era is an era of horrible films. That’s Sturgeon’s law for you.

Looking at the 2010s as a whole, we got to watch some amazing films.

We got great hard sci-fi like Gravity, Arrival, Ex Machina. The coming of age genre saw entries like Ladybird, Eighth Grade and Booksmart. Animation reached new heights with films like Inside Out, Spider-Man into the Spiderverse, and Kubo and the Two Strings.

We got comedies like The Artist, Grand Budapest Hotel, Death of Stalin, and Jojo Rabbit. Dramas like Moonlight, Fences, Spotlight, Parasite, Blue Jasmine.

Even in the ever-popular comic book genre, we got Logan and Joker playing at a very different level.

But also, it was the decade of the MCU. Let’s not underestimate what Disney has achieved with that — one big overarching story spanning over twenty films, bringing much deeper character development and more serious themes than what we’d gotten used to from blockbusters.

Re:Francis Ford Coppola’s $100M Dollar Bet by Icko on Monday February 21, 2022 @05:18AM (#30414001)
Not to understate what Disney did, but I feel like most of their characters don't have much depth.

I recently rewatched 12 angry men, and was surprised at how quickly and efficiently they introduced 12 characters. Off-hand remark by one character, an expression by another, the way they stood and moved around; in around 5 seconds you knew the characters without even knowing their names.

Contrast to Marvel's characters, which have hours of development each, yet don't really feel alive. All of them have tragic backstory, all of them are heroic in the same way, most of the male characters are snarky/sarcastic/have big egos.

Re:Francis Ford Coppola’s $100M Dollar Bet by SyzygistSix on Monday February 21, 2022 @07:53AM (#30415351)
>We got great hard sci-fi like Gravity, Arrival, Ex Machina

Those were terrible movies and not hard sci-fi. Okay, maybe Arrival was watchable.

Re:Francis Ford Coppola’s $100M Dollar Bet by kevin_thibedeau on Monday February 21, 2022 @04:50AM (#30413777)
Gravity is not hard sci-fi. It looks amazing in 3D but it violates the laws of physics in every way possible.
Re:Francis Ford Coppola’s $100M Dollar Bet by matt-attack on Monday February 21, 2022 @06:14PM (#30422003)
I found it quite compelling. It’s common for sci-fi films to violate our current understanding of physics, but to just explain it away as a new discovery in physics (think star trek’s warp drive). Others like Star Wars don’t even bother to explain anything about how their ships fly, enter atmospheres, etc.

What was unique about Gravity was that it was sci-if but set it our universe and in our contemporary time period. It at least tried to operate within the constraints of current inventory of space hardware. You are non-space-enthusiast it was amazing.

Re:Francis Ford Coppola’s $100M Dollar Bet by philistine on Monday February 21, 2022 @05:03AM (#30413872)
Yeah. Wall-E had more realistic use of a fire extinguisher to move in space.