MovieChat Forums > gantz8596 > Replies
gantz8596's Replies
I already said that I think it's on the same level as other marvel films (which is not that high, to be honest). Agree to disagree then.
And I've seen how many Americans defend the bombing. They actually think that there is nothing wrong with the bombings.
This is actually plot holes in ALL marvel movies except this one.
They already explained that they will only intervene if deviants are involved.
I'm more concerned about the fact that Ironman didn't do anything for captain America in winter soldier. Or the fact that all the avengers stay away from solo movies. Now that's the real plot holes.
1. What's that got to do with anything? Ironman was Jon Favreau's first superhero movie, Thor: Ragnarok was Taika Waititi's first superhero movie. Clearly, a lack of making one specific genre in movies doesn't mean they can't make a good movie in that genre?
2. She's a huge Marvel fan.
3. I don't think she does the casting, the whole diversity thing is what marvel is aiming for.
4. She directed this movie before she won her oscar. And she was the one approaching the studio about this movie.
5. No, the movie is on par with the rest of the Marvel movies. If you think highly of the other, then you should too with this one.
6. That's a matter of preference for you, I guess.
7. The same with points 5 and 6
8. Wut?
The filmmaker definitely adapted the anime instead the manga. I kinda disappointed that they don't show his childhood, but I'm very satisfied with the movie.
The only thing that I could criticize is the fact that the actor is way too older to play the teenager kenshin.
That's a loaded question, why must we choose between the two? Wouldn't it be for the best if neither case happened?
Rape is a rape, and false accusation is a false accusation. Why should how we treat one depends on the other?
Personally though, as a man, I find false accusation cases worse than rape cases. Because like how you mentioned, someone innocent who is charged with rape can spend decades in prison, while someone who wrongly accused others of rape doesn't spend as much time in prison. That is something that needs fixing.
I disagree with you on the movie belittling victim of false accusation. Because the movie is not about men who is wrongly accused, the movie is about a man who gets away with rape and the culture and community that supported him.
Feminists that are anti-men is abound nowadays, yes, fuck 'em. Again, just because one extreme side is wrong doesn't mean that the opposite extreme side is right.
I've read somewhere a woman national team decide to switch from bloomer to shorts, they got fined from the governing body.... That wasn't olympic, but I think that's the reason.
I think the first time the franchise toss logic and science out of the window was the fifth one. The one where they use cars to drag around the giant safe.
I thought both conversations happened at different times. The one with Sheldon probably happened right after Brandon killed clone Blackstar. That's why the bruised face and why he feared losing Brandon. It implies that he had Walter altered Brandon's mind to change his mind.
Kong was bigger though compared to his standalone film, right? Wasn't he supposed to keep growing?
Statham group wasn't planing a heist that day. He was asked to do simple information gathering. But unfortunately, it happened the day the military group hit the money van.
Most of these actors were just too handsome to play Peter Parker. Don't get me wrong, Tobey Maguire was also a beautiful man, be he can also pull that geek/nerd looks without effort.
I think Topher and Elijah would have made an interesting choice, certainly
Show me a medical school that has no party culture and I'll show you a dean who always tells the truth.
You can't compare her to Gosling in Crazy, Stupid, Love. Because he was a character that was supposed to be hot. She's not written like that. She's just a normal girl.
For the the Twitter guy to implied that she was not beautiful enough is really a low blow. Why would you criticize someone's look in a movie not about that? I'm against cancel culture for sure, but I can see why Mulligan respond to him like that.
Was she pretty enough to act as bait for those d-bags? Of course, men's standards are way lower than women's. You don't have to be pretty to be hit on in bars, you just have to be "available".
She's no Gal Gadot, yes, but she is beautiful.
Heavy? Yes. Sexual assault, victim-blaming, suicide.
Messages? Nothing new to learn, but it does try to point out the ignorance and hypocrisy that society has on dealing with sexual assault victims.
In the context of the movie's theme, it's because she trusted him. She might not be acquainted with him back then, but she liked the person that the guy turns out to be. He was nice, decent, smart, good-looking, what's not to like?
But I do agree that if there was a video, and it was shared among friends, there is no way that said video wouldn't have been posted online.
Well, to be honest, though. There is no such thing as AI.
Yeah, this kind of thing is already outside of the FBI's jurisdiction. If NSA was involved, the guy would probably get demoted and exiled somewhere, in the extreme case he might go "missing", but would never get arrested and indicted.
Yeah, I really don't know why the writer chooses med school as the background story. Maybe to justified Cassie dressed as a nurse at the end?
But I think it works. Most of the audience wouldn't know what you know about how it is in med school.
The unrealistic part for me was the final plan for Cassie, the bachelor party. Way too many things can go wrong.
1. What if some of the guys refused the drink she brought?
2. What if the dude refused to go upstairs?
3. What if he refused the handcuffs?
4. And after all that, what if he just didn't Kill her?
1&2) It's actually a pretty common thing. There are some real-life examples where sexual assaults got uncovered because of recording that was widely shared. Teens are stupid, drunk teens? Even more.
3) It was explained in the movie that she kept all of her phones, for all the pictures and videos on them.
4) She was ashamed. After all the excuses she gave Cassie, and then she got a taste of how it felt. Giving Cassie the recording is her way to "redeem" herself, but it's more like she just doesn't want to be involved anymore, she felt that by giving the recording making her "even".
I don't remember the book, but I'm pretty sure there were women names also, no? And in the movie, she did confront and punished the women that were involved.
About decent males, I already mentioned the lawyer. He was involved before, but he came to the realization that he was bad on his own, and he's been punishing himself ever since, I'd say that's pretty decent for a human being.
To be honest though, with the exception of neutral characters (parents, friends, polices, etc.), there are almost no decent characters in the movie, male or female, with the exception of Nina's mother and the lawyer.
As for your final point, it was a deliberate effort from the filmmaker, they want us to like the doctor. Just like in my original post, the movie tried to show the fragility of society.
What kind of nuance are you referring to?