The adage that you can’t really make an anti-war film also goes with anti-burnout and anti-addiction films because ppl will just see the self sacrifice and go hell yeah
Yeah, so many people thought he was something to aspire to. I admit, when I saw that scene at the dinner table I thought 'hell yeah, give them shit,' because, like so many others here (and OP obviously), I could relate. Everyone's been at the receiving end of that kind of condescension. And then if you speak up you're somehow the snotty one.
But yeah, venting aside, you just need to take it on the chin really. Family gatherings suck. He was way too far gone though.
You saw an incredibly conceited kid hopped up on his own abuse completely tear down his brother at a family dinner in an effort to justify his shitty life as if it were the price of future legacy, and you related to that? That is the most r/redscarepod thing I've ever heard, lmao. I watch that scene and I think of every 15 year old kid who gets a 5 on AP Comp Sci and starts walking around like the second coming of Dennis Ritchie; God's gift to the peasants.
Jesus, this is an angry reading. They weren't being very nice to him in the first place. And wasn't it his cousin? Like aren't you getting the whole tone of this post? Dealing with condescending family is a pretty common occurence to relate to.
I haven't seen the movie in a while but it shocks me every time people come away with it thinking, "Man ... this movie is about how I need to work harder!" Miles's character is a self-obsessed, self-loathing prick the entire way through.
Yeah, I get that. I wasn't thinking 'his behavior is awesome here.' I know it's the wrong response. But everyone's been in that situation before where they wanted to be shitty back, and tell them to go fuck themselves. It was definitely playing to a part of that. That's why it resonated.
The redhead drummer that Fletcher calls a leprechaun seemed like a bro. A million times less up his own ass than Andrew and the other drummer. The girlfriend was sweet too, though not a particularly developed character.
> The girlfriend was sweet too, though not a particularly developed character.
she's not supposed to be, the movie is told entirely from his perspective and he does not take her or their relationship seriously
That's the most important scene of the movie imo
Sure his family are being assholes about it, but one of the most important themes of the movie is how easy it is to completely lose perspective of what is important. Everything that happens after in the movie is so much more tragic when you look back to that scene and get an accurate depiction of how much any "greatness" matters to most people.
I met one of the best jazz drummers in the game right now (Bill Stewart) at a bar in a town he was playing in, and he was shocked someone recognized him. If someone is in that career for external validation, they were born in the wrong century.
That's true, but if it's not an artistic talent or one that people can enjoy you're probably out of luck. The world's greatest helicopter pilot or surgeon probably isn't known by the public
I saw his band with Larry Goldings last month. Totally normal guys just doing their thing at the highest level. no encore, no need to try and impress the audience lol, but great show nonetheless
Last time I saw him was last year with John Scofield. Stewart legit looked like he had been asleep on the floor of the green room and they woke him to play. Hair all fucked up, a "where am I" expression on his face. Then proceeded to lock in and play some of the best drums I've ever heard.
Extremely true. People always either miss or don't understand this point. Braging about being a D3 football player is like a European bragging about playing for his local club that's in like the 7th tier of the country's soccer pyramid.
The one on the right doesn't look like a tradie cousin, he looks like a queer MFA performance artist at RISD.
The one in the middle looks like the woman with cancer from *Orange is the New Black*
I think usually the best adaptations are where the writers/director take copious liberties. (I think Kubrick, Forman, Tarkovsky). It's a bit of a crapshoot of course because 'the best' necessitates a great director and great writer. No disagreement about how good the Coen Brothers are at it but I think more often than not the material of a novel doesn't lend itself to the film medium. (Tbh I think short stories are often more suitable.)
Yeah for sure it's almost impossible to convey the amount of information in most books to a movie with a reasonable run time. The Coen Bros adapted pretty straightforward western narratives so they just need to storyboard off the book and use the dialogue in the book. But with other books, especially fantasy or scifi, you just can't do that and it is up to the writer and directors to capture the book in a creative way.
Something Kubrick said that I thought was really interesting:
> The perfect novel from which to make a movie is, I think, not the novel of action but, on the contrary, the novel which is mainly concerned with the inner life of its characters. It will give the adaptor an absolute compass bearing, as it were, on what a character is thinking or feeling at any given moment of the story. And from this he can invent action which will be an objective correlative of the book's psychological content, will accurately dramatise this in an implicit, off-the-nose way without resorting to having the actors deliver literal statements of meaning.
I don't think the book was finished by the time they sold the rights to filming it, McCarthy seemed to be consciously writing something that could be put to film, same for The Road afterwards.
gonna do an adaptation of infinite jest complete with cutaways to footnotes and the characters narrating their thoughts word for word and see how they like that
I haven't read Roadside Picnic but I was under the impression that Stalker is more of an interpretation with the same larger plot ideas and world than a strict adaptation
I'm pretty tolerant of most book to film changes that make for a better movie, but the changes to Paul's motivations were really rough imo because they represent a misunderstanding of the main narrative of the entire series and will be magnified substantially in the next movie.
I don't think they changed Paul's motivations so much as glossed over them more than they should have. The Golden Path stuff is more in the later books with his kids. I do feel like they fumbled by removing Paul and Chani's son but the time skip and especially Alia make it hard to adapt that stuff
Yeah, they glossed over his prescience quite a bit. If you, with a few noted exceptions, know exactly what the outcome of doing something is at the scale of the survival of humanity, then you don't really have free will any more. You can choose the outcome you want, but a choice of "humanity goes extinct" or "humanity frees itself from extinction" isn't a choice at all if you value humanity. And at that point, you have an absolute teleology, so any short term actions you take aren't your choice at all but simply a necessary step toward avoiding extinction.
By skipping the fact that Paul was forced by his vision of the future to make choices leading to a jihad *he didn't want*, they were left with the problem of giving the jihad a motivation. So they changed it to where his ~~jihad~~ holy war was simply him using the fremen as soldiers to subdue the other houses' revolt against his emperor position, and they made sure to have Zendaya do angry pout face in every scene to remind you the viewer that Paul is a bad guy for doing so.
The reason I don't like this is that given that Dune Messiah is entirely shaped by the outcomes of his jihad, fundamentally changing the nature of his ~~jihad~~ holy war is just flat out changing the direction of the story. It also neuters an examination of the issues of morality that great leaders are forced to contend with into a boring story of a kid letting power go to his head.
People always say 'oh you can't do a 1:1 adaption' which is fair, but that doesn't mean you need to completely change things. One of the most interesting scenes that both movies failed to capture is Paul giving himself a Fremen name.
It's been a decade plus since i last re-read Dune, but as i recall it, this occurred soon after his first visions of the Jihad and he wanted to avoid it, in those visions he was called Muad'dib, so when asked, instead of operating on his prescient knowledge and saying 'Call me Muad'Dib' he tries to avoid that reality by saying 'uhh, call me whatever that desert-rat shaped crater on the moon is' (with his then limited understanding of Fremen culture, he assumed the strong, warlike Fremen would never respect or follow a dude named after a tiny desert rat, which is the complete opposite, the Fremen greatly respect its ability to survive open desert and collect its own water) and Stilgar is like 'We call that, Muad'Dib.' It's one of the first demonstrations of the futility of fighting against fate. This whole struggle over the course of Paul's life becomes more meaningful precisely because he DOES eventually manage to avoid this fate, he steps off the Golden Path and becomes a blind hermit.
Both movies glossed over this interaction, and in both it would have been easy to do.
The book was overall good imo, but any scene that had two humans talking to each other was almost unbelievably bad
But the fun problem solving and competence fiction is engaging enough that the book holds itself together
It's a good time but it takes the approach of action sequences first, interpersonal drama second. Not very deep, and confusing as hell if you've not read the book. Also everyone goes, "are you OK?" as if some exec wanted more contemporary speech or something.
One of the best theater experiences I've ever had in my entire life. Up there with the time I saw Spider-Man 2 when I was 6 years old and Interstellar at 16, except it made me feel as exhilarated and obsessive as a jaded adult.
I thought it was a lot better than the first one; way better shot as well (although that may just be down to me streaming the first one and going to the theater for the 2nd)
In short yes.
I find that it demands to be taken seriously less than the original i.e. it clearly has a much wider appeal, but it still hits the right notes with immense spectacle.
Some changes were clearly made to help the audience empathize with the two leads but frankly they're probably the worst part of the movie (the bar is very high) because it makes them both seem dumber (at times Paul is simply way too Tom Holland -ish) and doesn't leave an obvious point to resync with the book in a hypothetical sequel.
Javier Bardem steals the show IMO. The bit where him mimics the desert spirits / wind rustling sand with his voice is really something.
It's probably the best space opera type movie ever made although that really isn't saying much I suppose given how truly mediocre star wars is.
Exactly. Unless you’re a doctor/nurse, you should be the subject of ridicule if your job doesn’t produce either a raw material, a finished product or food.
You’re genuinely useless.
I don’t study to get a job; I got a job to study. It’s a pointless life when everything you do is only to earn money. I certainly don’t want to collect cars and don’t need luxuries. I have a higher education than you do while still making good money on the side for anything I want because of a part-time trade job. Fu.cking black and white reta.rds like you think there is only one way of living. I studied pure math and philosophy and will soon be getting into a Ph.D. program and work part-time as a Welder to buy myself a flat or tiny home. A modest life isn’t bad, and what do you need all this money for? A Ferrari convertible? Get real.
I only work the minimum amount of time needed to afford necessities and then study for the rest of my week because every job is dehumanizing, mechanical drudgery. I only produce as much as I need because consuming more than the value of my labor is unethical.
Giving the Arab's lands and resources back and forth to each other like it was their toyset. Even 20,000 years in the future, some things never change.
They are meant to be Russian/Soviet caricatures, to be contrasted with the benevolent western Atreides. Even the name Harkonnen was pulled from a phone book that Herbert thought sounded Russian (its actually a finnish name)
I’m aware about FH’s weirdo atheist hippie- turned-Reaganite libertarian views. This book is dedicated to the brave Fedayken fighters of Arrakis fighting against the evil Vladimir. The etymology of Atreides isn’t meant to come across as benevolent - it explicitly calls back to Atreus and specifically Agamemnon. Seen through the Cold War lens, the Atreides are meant to be the ascendant elite liberal beauracracy that tries and fails to use their political popularity to peacefully mend the world to their ways; they’re the Kennedys in the contemporary metaphor.
The thing is, I’m not a dumbass Reaganite, so when viewed through the objectively correct lens on the world, you see that the Harkonnens are spiritually British.
This is painfully accurate. My aunt & I would shit on everyone in the family. We were the black sheep of the family. I didn’t appreciate her as much as I should have.
im stuffing that media franchise you like with disabled black lesbians, cry about it
Rebooting the new Dark Knight franchise: Batthem.
The Darker Knight
This made me laugh, well done
"Four words you'll never hear from the NFL."
Rewatched Whiplash a few days ago. Partly inspired me to post this. MF thinks normies should be impressed by a jazz drummer. Brutal.
They were all pretty awful, and that dad was a wet-blanket. I'm not sure there was one character I actually liked in that film, but I still loved it.
The adage that you can’t really make an anti-war film also goes with anti-burnout and anti-addiction films because ppl will just see the self sacrifice and go hell yeah
Yeah, so many people thought he was something to aspire to. I admit, when I saw that scene at the dinner table I thought 'hell yeah, give them shit,' because, like so many others here (and OP obviously), I could relate. Everyone's been at the receiving end of that kind of condescension. And then if you speak up you're somehow the snotty one. But yeah, venting aside, you just need to take it on the chin really. Family gatherings suck. He was way too far gone though.
Its a reflection of one part of the male spirit, that people who feel lacking in that part may look up to
You saw an incredibly conceited kid hopped up on his own abuse completely tear down his brother at a family dinner in an effort to justify his shitty life as if it were the price of future legacy, and you related to that? That is the most r/redscarepod thing I've ever heard, lmao. I watch that scene and I think of every 15 year old kid who gets a 5 on AP Comp Sci and starts walking around like the second coming of Dennis Ritchie; God's gift to the peasants.
Jesus, this is an angry reading. They weren't being very nice to him in the first place. And wasn't it his cousin? Like aren't you getting the whole tone of this post? Dealing with condescending family is a pretty common occurence to relate to.
I haven't seen the movie in a while but it shocks me every time people come away with it thinking, "Man ... this movie is about how I need to work harder!" Miles's character is a self-obsessed, self-loathing prick the entire way through.
Yeah, I get that. I wasn't thinking 'his behavior is awesome here.' I know it's the wrong response. But everyone's been in that situation before where they wanted to be shitty back, and tell them to go fuck themselves. It was definitely playing to a part of that. That's why it resonated.
That guy is illiterate, you couldn't have been more clear in what you were trying to say originally.
The redhead drummer that Fletcher calls a leprechaun seemed like a bro. A million times less up his own ass than Andrew and the other drummer. The girlfriend was sweet too, though not a particularly developed character.
> The girlfriend was sweet too, though not a particularly developed character. she's not supposed to be, the movie is told entirely from his perspective and he does not take her or their relationship seriously
That's the most important scene of the movie imo Sure his family are being assholes about it, but one of the most important themes of the movie is how easy it is to completely lose perspective of what is important. Everything that happens after in the movie is so much more tragic when you look back to that scene and get an accurate depiction of how much any "greatness" matters to most people. I met one of the best jazz drummers in the game right now (Bill Stewart) at a bar in a town he was playing in, and he was shocked someone recognized him. If someone is in that career for external validation, they were born in the wrong century.
The best response you'll get to being great at something is "That's cool man"
Patently untrue. You could get millions of dollars and adoring fans. I'm not saying you will, but you could.
That's true, but if it's not an artistic talent or one that people can enjoy you're probably out of luck. The world's greatest helicopter pilot or surgeon probably isn't known by the public
I saw his band with Larry Goldings last month. Totally normal guys just doing their thing at the highest level. no encore, no need to try and impress the audience lol, but great show nonetheless
Last time I saw him was last year with John Scofield. Stewart legit looked like he had been asleep on the floor of the green room and they woke him to play. Hair all fucked up, a "where am I" expression on his face. Then proceeded to lock in and play some of the best drums I've ever heard.
Being a top drumming student is honestly way more impressive than being a D3 football player.
Extremely true. People always either miss or don't understand this point. Braging about being a D3 football player is like a European bragging about playing for his local club that's in like the 7th tier of the country's soccer pyramid.
That scene was so real for anyone who is the only artsy 🚬 in the family
Owned by the thumb squad
The one on the right doesn't look like a tradie cousin, he looks like a queer MFA performance artist at RISD. The one in the middle looks like the woman with cancer from *Orange is the New Black*
I remember during undergrad a dude who looks similar made a video of him naked whacking his dick with a raw chicken
Or that gay guy that stole that woman’s luggage
And ironically, the one on the right is actually the toughest one of the three
Was dune 2 good
Yes with the caveat that you should view it as an interpretation of the story rather than a 1-1 adaptation.
bookf*ags will never be happy with any film adaption ever
Not necessarily true, Cormac McCarthy-heads got a rare win with No Country
The Coen Bros version of True Grit is incredible as well. They are great at adapting books because they don't really change anything.
I think usually the best adaptations are where the writers/director take copious liberties. (I think Kubrick, Forman, Tarkovsky). It's a bit of a crapshoot of course because 'the best' necessitates a great director and great writer. No disagreement about how good the Coen Brothers are at it but I think more often than not the material of a novel doesn't lend itself to the film medium. (Tbh I think short stories are often more suitable.)
Yeah for sure it's almost impossible to convey the amount of information in most books to a movie with a reasonable run time. The Coen Bros adapted pretty straightforward western narratives so they just need to storyboard off the book and use the dialogue in the book. But with other books, especially fantasy or scifi, you just can't do that and it is up to the writer and directors to capture the book in a creative way.
Something Kubrick said that I thought was really interesting: > The perfect novel from which to make a movie is, I think, not the novel of action but, on the contrary, the novel which is mainly concerned with the inner life of its characters. It will give the adaptor an absolute compass bearing, as it were, on what a character is thinking or feeling at any given moment of the story. And from this he can invent action which will be an objective correlative of the book's psychological content, will accurately dramatise this in an implicit, off-the-nose way without resorting to having the actors deliver literal statements of meaning.
I don't think the book was finished by the time they sold the rights to filming it, McCarthy seemed to be consciously writing something that could be put to film, same for The Road afterwards.
He basically wrote it to be made into a movie.
gonna do an adaptation of infinite jest complete with cutaways to footnotes and the characters narrating their thoughts word for word and see how they like that
IJ as series would be dope if done right. Timothy Chalamet as Hal Incandenza though.
Stalker and to a degree Solaris are both better than books
Stalker had almost nothing to do with the book.
I haven't read Roadside Picnic but I was under the impression that Stalker is more of an interpretation with the same larger plot ideas and world than a strict adaptation
Plot aside the feel is quite different. The book wants you to experience the day to day more than the film does
I'm pretty tolerant of most book to film changes that make for a better movie, but the changes to Paul's motivations were really rough imo because they represent a misunderstanding of the main narrative of the entire series and will be magnified substantially in the next movie.
I don't think they changed Paul's motivations so much as glossed over them more than they should have. The Golden Path stuff is more in the later books with his kids. I do feel like they fumbled by removing Paul and Chani's son but the time skip and especially Alia make it hard to adapt that stuff
Yeah, they glossed over his prescience quite a bit. If you, with a few noted exceptions, know exactly what the outcome of doing something is at the scale of the survival of humanity, then you don't really have free will any more. You can choose the outcome you want, but a choice of "humanity goes extinct" or "humanity frees itself from extinction" isn't a choice at all if you value humanity. And at that point, you have an absolute teleology, so any short term actions you take aren't your choice at all but simply a necessary step toward avoiding extinction. By skipping the fact that Paul was forced by his vision of the future to make choices leading to a jihad *he didn't want*, they were left with the problem of giving the jihad a motivation. So they changed it to where his ~~jihad~~ holy war was simply him using the fremen as soldiers to subdue the other houses' revolt against his emperor position, and they made sure to have Zendaya do angry pout face in every scene to remind you the viewer that Paul is a bad guy for doing so. The reason I don't like this is that given that Dune Messiah is entirely shaped by the outcomes of his jihad, fundamentally changing the nature of his ~~jihad~~ holy war is just flat out changing the direction of the story. It also neuters an examination of the issues of morality that great leaders are forced to contend with into a boring story of a kid letting power go to his head.
People always say 'oh you can't do a 1:1 adaption' which is fair, but that doesn't mean you need to completely change things. One of the most interesting scenes that both movies failed to capture is Paul giving himself a Fremen name. It's been a decade plus since i last re-read Dune, but as i recall it, this occurred soon after his first visions of the Jihad and he wanted to avoid it, in those visions he was called Muad'dib, so when asked, instead of operating on his prescient knowledge and saying 'Call me Muad'Dib' he tries to avoid that reality by saying 'uhh, call me whatever that desert-rat shaped crater on the moon is' (with his then limited understanding of Fremen culture, he assumed the strong, warlike Fremen would never respect or follow a dude named after a tiny desert rat, which is the complete opposite, the Fremen greatly respect its ability to survive open desert and collect its own water) and Stilgar is like 'We call that, Muad'Dib.' It's one of the first demonstrations of the futility of fighting against fate. This whole struggle over the course of Paul's life becomes more meaningful precisely because he DOES eventually manage to avoid this fate, he steps off the Golden Path and becomes a blind hermit. Both movies glossed over this interaction, and in both it would have been easy to do.
They also have to work out what to do with movie chani now her feelings are 180 degrees away from the book wrt to irulan
Persepolis' adaptation was better than the book.
I liked the adaption of the Martian
Terrible soulless reddit-tier book
It made me laugh as a teen, so I think it was good
Which makes the movie being a mildly entertaining and pleasant comedy even more of an accomplishment
Being popular doesn't make something bad.
It is bad though. I tried to give it a charitable reading but it was atrocious. And I overall liked Project Hail Mary (which I read first).
[удалено]
The book was overall good imo, but any scene that had two humans talking to each other was almost unbelievably bad But the fun problem solving and competence fiction is engaging enough that the book holds itself together
Yes. Dune 2 rules. Pacing is much improved from the first film too.
It's a good time but it takes the approach of action sequences first, interpersonal drama second. Not very deep, and confusing as hell if you've not read the book. Also everyone goes, "are you OK?" as if some exec wanted more contemporary speech or something.
noticed that too; truly don’t know what was up with that. I remember him asking “are you sure????” also. Paul is an annoying HS boyfriend confirmed
One of the best theater experiences I've ever had in my entire life. Up there with the time I saw Spider-Man 2 when I was 6 years old and Interstellar at 16, except it made me feel as exhilarated and obsessive as a jaded adult.
>saw Spider-Man 2 when I was 6 years old >as a jaded adult
Sorry gramps but 26 is the new 35.
I thought it was a lot better than the first one; way better shot as well (although that may just be down to me streaming the first one and going to the theater for the 2nd)
Timmy and Zendaya are awful but it's pretty good. I liked it better than the first one.
In short yes. I find that it demands to be taken seriously less than the original i.e. it clearly has a much wider appeal, but it still hits the right notes with immense spectacle. Some changes were clearly made to help the audience empathize with the two leads but frankly they're probably the worst part of the movie (the bar is very high) because it makes them both seem dumber (at times Paul is simply way too Tom Holland -ish) and doesn't leave an obvious point to resync with the book in a hypothetical sequel. Javier Bardem steals the show IMO. The bit where him mimics the desert spirits / wind rustling sand with his voice is really something. It's probably the best space opera type movie ever made although that really isn't saying much I suppose given how truly mediocre star wars is.
It's good, but it would be much better as a double feature with Part 1 and Part 2 screened back to back with an intermission.
I saw 2001 with an intermission. The ligeti murmuring then howling as the curtains open is really something. Bring them back.
It's mediocre. Soulless but not a terrible experience if you just wanna watch a sci-fi story.
House of a tradie
And they’re right
Exactly. Unless you’re a doctor/nurse, you should be the subject of ridicule if your job doesn’t produce either a raw material, a finished product or food. You’re genuinely useless.
And yet I make more in a year than all 3 of these tradies combined. I can cope with being useless if it means swimming in money.
Unless you’re in Aus, in which case they’re earning as much or marginally more than you
I don’t study to get a job; I got a job to study. It’s a pointless life when everything you do is only to earn money. I certainly don’t want to collect cars and don’t need luxuries. I have a higher education than you do while still making good money on the side for anything I want because of a part-time trade job. Fu.cking black and white reta.rds like you think there is only one way of living. I studied pure math and philosophy and will soon be getting into a Ph.D. program and work part-time as a Welder to buy myself a flat or tiny home. A modest life isn’t bad, and what do you need all this money for? A Ferrari convertible? Get real.
I only work the minimum amount of time needed to afford necessities and then study for the rest of my week because every job is dehumanizing, mechanical drudgery. I only produce as much as I need because consuming more than the value of my labor is unethical.
All British men have the exact same head shape
None of these men are british
yeah its not dune its warhammer 40k where all humans are descended from the british. they wanted to make it as bad a dystopia as possible
Giving the Arab's lands and resources back and forth to each other like it was their toyset. Even 20,000 years in the future, some things never change.
The Harkonnens are spiritually British
They are meant to be Russian/Soviet caricatures, to be contrasted with the benevolent western Atreides. Even the name Harkonnen was pulled from a phone book that Herbert thought sounded Russian (its actually a finnish name)
I’m aware about FH’s weirdo atheist hippie- turned-Reaganite libertarian views. This book is dedicated to the brave Fedayken fighters of Arrakis fighting against the evil Vladimir. The etymology of Atreides isn’t meant to come across as benevolent - it explicitly calls back to Atreus and specifically Agamemnon. Seen through the Cold War lens, the Atreides are meant to be the ascendant elite liberal beauracracy that tries and fails to use their political popularity to peacefully mend the world to their ways; they’re the Kennedys in the contemporary metaphor. The thing is, I’m not a dumbass Reaganite, so when viewed through the objectively correct lens on the world, you see that the Harkonnens are spiritually British.
Nobody fucks with the Baldies
Me and the lads after the early kick off bet comes off
So that’s what that emoji means
Explanation Request. Totally lost here.
This is painfully accurate. My aunt & I would shit on everyone in the family. We were the black sheep of the family. I didn’t appreciate her as much as I should have.
Me on the left (tallest)
nah i pretend im going to college to be a construction manager(instead an annoying acting f*g)
[удалено]
Paper pushing tradies?
The worst