MovieChat Forums > LenkoPenko > Replies
LenkoPenko's Replies
I don't think she's an amazing actress by any means, but I enjoy her roles.
She picks stuff that fits her admittedly limited range and makes it work imo.
In the podcast they only speculated on it. They talked about his past and how he had this attitude of "not quitting until he could do it". They brought up football plays/moves, some of which he'd be completely and utterly incompetent at performing, while insisting on doing however many repetitions necessary to be able to perform them properly, even if it took him months. It's sorta what he did with those patients. He knew what he had to do on a theoretical level but he lacked the experience/ability to actually perform them... so he "practiced". The podcast also talked about his heavy drug use, which I assume contributed to whatever the fuck was wrong with this guy's head.
I think it was mentioned they were supposed to have a week of training and then a week of combat.
Dunno what the point of it was, besides cannon fodder.
I suppose they were desperate by that point.
They weren't supposed to even land there, but I also don't get how the possibility of a misfire never occurred to the future people, lol.
I figured it was a particularly cold day (or time of day). So cold they couldn't move.
Once they defrosted a bit, I'm sure they got right back on their merry way.
If that's what they want then why not? A lot of marriages don't work out (regardless of whether or not they have children) and people end up getting a divorce. Some do.
Also, marriage doesn't actually prevent or restrict people from having relationships outside of it...
Yeah, I'm aware. Was hoping for something a bit less "in your face".
Yeah, that wasn't a complaint about this adaptation in particular, but of the concept as a whole. And nope, haven't read the book or seen miniseries because, as you see, the story itself doesn't really interest me. I had hoped this adaptation would offer a different interpretation.
Like others have said, the time jumps are very poorly done. The whole plot feels really messy.
My biggest gripe with the story in general is the personification of "good" vs "evil" driving you to make a choice. It's so simplistic and uninspired.
Coconut milk is ok and dark chocolate almond milk is pretty good.
Need actual cow dairy in my coffee though xD
A few seasons into Matt Smith's doctor.
I didn't really like him from the begging, but there were some interesting stories.
Then it sorta devolved into an endless, repetitious mess...
If you want more coherent themes and structure, you should read the novel.
The movie adaptation was more arthouse than anything, imo.
Bond being fictional is indeed a valid answer.
Is him being white essential to his character, to the point that a non-white actor can't play him?
I don't think so.
Would it make more sense to just do some other Bond type agent thing within the same universe? Yeah, sure.
Who cares though? Especially if you consider the 007 thing to be a code name and not a single character.
As for Cleopatra, I don't personally care about the specific ethnicity of the actress,
but she should look the part (whatever it is)...
Sorta like you wouldn't cast a non-black person as Nelson Mandela.
I saw a bit of the trailer when it came out and got intrigued enough to watch it.
The hype was quite out there, I agree, but I managed to stay away from spoilers before watching the actual movie.
I wasn't even sure if it was going to be pure psychological horror or have supernatural elements to it.
As for it "ripping off" elements of other movies, I don't think I can agree with that point.
Genres have tropes they rely on, and I think this movie utilized the ones it did quite well.
I also quite enjoyed the slow build-up, family drama and cult elements.
I'm not sure what it was trying to be besides a personal story gone fucked (with horror elements), and tbh, I don't bother with such questions.
Is it the best horror movie in decades?
I think it was just marketing. Not to mention, things like that are subjective.
It worked for me and I enjoyed it, is all I can say.
lmfao, are you a child? "Case closed" AHAHAHAHAHHA!
You don't think, period.
You just regurgitate scores.
Aw, quitting so soon?
K, bye now!
Cool story, bro.
Something being good for the time doesn't mean it holds up.
Like I said, it's just my opinion (not an analysis, like you seem to think) and your "consideration" of it is meaningless. I know nostalgia is a strong drug and people sure love huffing its fumes, but man, some of these so called classics are just plain bad and you're taking this way too seriously.
So?
There're still plenty of people who tout the first adaptation as being the best, simply because it was the first... Personally, I feel it's poorly acted and not very well made, so I'm not a fan of the 70s version. It's definitely better than the 2013 remake, but in my opinion the 2002 version is the best one.
Actually, I didn't get that impression at all (that she was just a bored housewife).
The first episode made her appear to be very politically driven, while also being a homemaker who wasn't particularly interested in that bill to begin with, but eventually saw it as an opportunity to advance her political career.
To preface, I'm a non-American who wasn't familiar with Phyllis Schlafly until coming across this series.
I meant that in general, and even said I don't have patience for that sort of thing anymore, lol.
Not that it really matters, but I watched all of season 6 and I didn't like direction the show was taking (hence the loss of interest). I didn't feel like returning at all after that season, and honestly, watching season 6 felt like a waste of time.
I used to be like that, but I guess I eventually lost the patience needed to watch something I could no longer enjoy.
Could be all the hate-watching got me jaded, haha!
Or maybe you just enjoyed it enough to not give up on it, but it wasn't the case with me, unfortunately.