MovieChat Forums > pzogel > Replies
pzogel's Replies
The weight gain appears to be recent, older pics indicate more normal body fat levels.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyTfaCGy6t8
Girl, Interrupted
Finn has no role in TROS. He has no agency outside of screaming 'REEEEEEEYYYYYYY' every two minutes.
[quote]A lot of movies have this though. People are still upset that Rachel McAdams and Ryan Gosling aren't a thing. Fans of Titanic were disappointed that Kate and Leo weren't a couple.[/quote]
Being upset is one thing. Sending death threaths to the director because he dared killing off Driver's character is another.
Boyega's criticism is fully warranted. Here's some context.
For starters, the posters of TFA were changed for the Chinese markets, where black people aren't marketable at all. The size of his likeness was reduced and he was moved to the background. It's not far-fetched to believe that in an effort to further appeal to the Chinese market, Boyega's role was also increasingly thinned out for the subsequent movies. This would be doubly remarkable given how much TFA hinted at Finn possibly being force-sensitive, or at least someone who'll be more than just Jar Jar 2.0.
Furthermore, there's a certain segment within the fanbase that obsess over Rey and Kylo ('Reylos'). For the most part, they treat Rey as their self-insert as Adam Driver is their object of affection. These people (which are complete and utter lunatics) *flooded* Boyega with hate mail about him keeping his hands off both Rey and Daisy Ridley. In their weird fantasy, they actually believe Ridly and Driver are secretly engaged in real life (Driver's wife gets lots of hate mail about this as well). Quite a few Reylos are deeply racist and don't want a 'dirty black' touch their precious Rey. Again, Rey is their self-insert, and they don't want to be engaged with a black guy. For every hint towards a relationship between Rey and Finn Boyega got terabytes worth of hate mail.
Keeping the above in mind, it's most assuredly not far-fetched to believe that Boyega was effectively written out of TROS as a result. China and Reylos had priority, and since both JJ Abrams and Chris Terrio are hacks they had no idea what to do with Finn, and left him as a pointless sidekick. It's the same with Oscar Isaac's character, who got a stereotypical drug smuggler backstory for his Latino character, which isn't even consistent with several canon-status graphic novels (he came from a family of pilots there).
To sum it up: Boyega had to deal with barrels of hate coming from crazy Reylos while getting zero support from the bigwigs at Disney, who had no reservations when it came to writing him out of the trilogy just to appeal to racist markets like China.
Looks okay. Gives me a circa 1994, 'The Crow' vibe. Not necessarily a bad thing.
I, for one, am thankful Batman doesn't have throat cancer in this.
I'm inclined to agree with you, but I think there's a key difference. Most of Nolan's stories are, on the most basic level, driven by character motivations—think DiCaprio in Inception, Jackman in Prestige, McConaughey in Intersteller and so on. Yet, it's difficult to be engaged in any of their motives to any degree since they're essentially non-characters, mere functions that are required to make the overarching ('cerebral') story work. Nolan is only interested in the latter, yet his conceptual framework is grounded in the characters, which he pays no attention to. Hitchcock, by comparison, very much cares about his characters—'Rebecca' being one of the more profound examples.
Nolan is utterly incapable of writing compelling characters these days, so he needs to have some gimmick to make his stories seem 'bold' and 'exciting'. After Inception he's given up on writing characters that are conceivably interesting on their own, he just uses them as vehicles to convey his 'intriguing' ideas.
D E E P
E
E
P
<blockquote>Overlong, noisy, full of poe-faced delivery of portentous dialogue, needlessly convoluted plot threads, unearned sense of gravitas that verges on the unintentionally hilarious and a script that isn't even vaguely as clever as it seems to think it is</blockquote>
This is actually a surprisingly universally fitting yet oddly accurate critique for most of Nolan's body of work.
Nothing more attractive than being greeted by a shitty log during the climax.
Real question is, would you allow her to poop on you in return?
I'm not the only one who noticed it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Dunkirk/comments/6pluad/color_grading_explain_it_to_me_please/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Dunkirk/comments/6olsmt/inconsistencies_in_color_grading_and_shots/
The second link has some comments that link to other sources as well, going more into detail about the production process.
Me naming one example doesn't mean that there isn't more than one. OTOH, the Disney+ OT release has a green tint instead of a blue one now, although not consistently either. It's fan editions like 4k77 who finally managed to get the colours right, i.e., what they looked like in theatre.
Another example would be Blade Runner's Final Cut, which too got the green teal treatment, ruining the colour timing of the original in the process.
If we assume that it is entirely intentional—why does the colour grading at times change multiple times even during a single scene (pretty much with every shot)? Even if we entertain the possibility that the colour grading is due to IMAX (where colours may come out looking different than on your average TV) and specifically tuned for that, it would still not explain the rapid change in colour tones. Overall, I'm getting the impression that someone must've dropped the ball on this somewhere.
And make no mistake, errors in colour grading happen all the time. Check the 2011 blu-ray release of the Star Wars OT, it's completely drenched in a blue tint that destroys white balance. A rookie mistake, yet it passed every single production stage. It's not outside the realm of possibility that colour grading goes awry on a major production.
They're both somewhat competent directors (in sharp contrast to writing, which they're both horrendous at), at least as far as technicality goes. Overall, I'm inclined to hand this to RJ, simply because the pacing and overall plot structure in TLJ is incredibly messy, and all over the place tonally. JJ isn't far behind though, with his frenetic pacing whose sole purpose consists in covering up the gaping plot holes and nonsensical plot devices. They're both awful in their own way, and terrible choices to helm a Star Wars movie.
So what's worse: 'The Dead Speak!' or 'The First Order Reigns.' (after their main base got blown to pieces minutes ago)?
'You just don't get TLJ's profound philosophical outlook and deep themes', typically followed by 'It's just a movie about space wizards with laserswords made for kids and not meant to be taken seriously'.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-wars-palpatines-final-order-rise-skywalker-explained-1264714?fbclid=IwAR1U624bqeAD6FhM6HtrYlaku178OGrCoRmBJkMM10pdoJm4sOW1rKeR7VM
Don't worry, JJ and Chris Terrio have all of this figured out thoroughly and in a highly cohesive fashion.
It's Snoke ragdolling Hux, but there are indeed plenty of scenes which make Hux look like a joke. That deleted scene is just the worst offender, that's why I chose it.