Recent comments in /f/movies

Neolife t1_j6k1cq0 wrote

When were the Cancon rules established? The 90s had Shania Twain and Alanis Morissette, who had 2 of the 3 best-selling albums of the decade, and Come On Over has become the best selling album by a solo female artist of all time.

It would probably be tough to find a period since the 60s where no Canadian artists were heavily played in the US. Between The Band, Joni Mitchell, Rush, Gordon Lightfoot, Bryan Adams, Neil Young, Shania Twain, Alanis Morissette, Celine Dion, Michael Bublé, Arcade Fire, Drake, Justin Bieber, Shawn Mendes, and The Weekend, you've covered a massive span with huge artists.

1

dafunkmunk t1_j6k1760 wrote

You mean he literally just did the exact same thing as he did with the first one? Apparently he was smart enough to realize he needed to wait over 10 years before making this movie so people will have forgotten everything and not shit on the movie for failing to have any meaningful story again

0

Hotdog_Ketchup t1_j6k136f wrote

The particulars of the resource in question are not as important as what it represents, which is unfettered expansion, consumption, conquering the untamed stars because humanity has used up too much of Earth. The themes of the film are broad, but that is exactly what Cameron is trying to accomplish, make spanning, universal stories.

The comments here saying that the film is "too long" and how much of it "doesn't advance the story" are frankly depressing. Cameron respects his audience enough to let the film breathe, to have the viewer really feel the spectacle. He doesn't spend a decade on CG tech to stroke his own dick, he does it so that his story has a soul. The beauty of Pandora's oceans is not "showing off", it's critical to the essence of the film.

9

Problemwoodchuck t1_j6k0a7m wrote

I think I can help with a few of your questions. The order of the bounties isn't important. It's Django learning the ropes of being a bounty hunter to establish him as gunfighter so his big rampage at the end isn't out of nowhere.

Steven's position in Candieland is essentially he's a collaborator who enjoys some privileges due to his long standing relationship with Candie. He's far to old to labor, so he maintains his position through guile, flattery, and degrading others.

The money isn't the issue with D'Artagnan and Candie. It's about Candie having the power of life and death over D'Artagnan, brutally intimidating Schulz and Django, and establishing Candie as one of the movie's villains.

Schulz kills Candie out of contempt and probably some wounded ego after his plan to con Candie into releasing Hilde fails. There's also a good chance that Candie's men were going to kill them anyways, so Schulz may have just wanted to take Candie down with him. Tarantino deliberately avoids giving us clear answers in that scene; Schulz's "I couldn't resist" is meant to open to interpretation.

3

CrackPlug80 t1_j6k031u wrote

I'm sorry but yes they absolutely are shallow and meaningless. They are assembly line produced movies meant for kids and teenagers. If you like them that's cool, but don't pretend they are something they aren't.

Also you act like there's some grand narrative to the whole thing, when in reality it's just like 30 repetitive movies that are essentially the same thing as the last one. Good super hero vs big bad super villain. CGI battle. That's about the extent of it. Once you've seen one of them, you've seen them all

1

catcodex t1_j6jzyzo wrote

While most of the visuals were fun to watch, the constant use of "bro" in the dialogue was distracting. I guess he was showing that cultures all act the same, with teenagers having beefs with each other ("It's called a punch, b*tch"), but I feel like I've seen that dynamic a million times on film before.

1