MovieChat Forums > avortac4
avatar

avortac4 (615)


Posts


What a psycho Corpse in a plane doesn't change anything? They lied, broke the rules Really different movie Dark Phoenix Plot Hole (Speed) Deep character flaw Stupid People try to explain Schizophrenic Unrealistic Incompetence The Rumour Chain couldn't happen View all posts >


Replies


"answer - VOLUME.......... what the hell did that mean? " At first, I figured it means if they're loud and brash enough, the girl would become attracted. On second thought, maybe he meant that he'll kiss a LARGE VOLUME of girls until he stumbles upon the 'most beautiful one' (unlikely as that seems). (and by what criteria would they select that panel or jury, how, why, and why those people and not some others?) Heck, they would probably need a year just to compiled the jury alone! Not to mention how big an invasion of PRIVACY building this kind of database would be, and how it would go against freedom and constitutions of the worlds' countries! Even IF they would be able to do ALL this (which I very seriously doubt), what if they disagree about who the most beautiful girl ends up being? How do they solve the age-old problem of 'preferences' and 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder' and 'she's more beautiful technically, but the other girl is actually cuter and is way more charming'-problems? How do they make 'beauty' something so clearly definable instead of a matter of an opinion, viewpoint, preference, etc.? I have seen really ugly women that some men have told me are beautiful in their opinion, and vice versa. Beauty is fluid, mobile and not 100% definable. It is very real, but people see it in different ways, and different forms and ways of beauty light up different people. Sure, a beauty queen celebrity has millions of fans thinking they're beautiful, but there are people who think she's not beautiful. Maeda Atsuko might be 'beautiful' technically, but there are people that might prefer someone 'technically uglier' but more charming to kiss. What if that happens to Jack's or Morgan's characters? They are forced then to kiss someone they'd rather not, and not kiss someone they'd rather kiss. What kind of a bucket list is this anyway?? They really didn't think this through, did they? And I mean the REAL culprits, the STUPID movie writers. This whole thing was the most impossible thing on that - or probably any - list. Not because a rich guy like Jack's character or a famous actor like Morgan couldn't pretty much kiss any girl they want.. ..it's because of logistics and the narrowness of the temporal window. First they would have to shift through ALL the girls in the world - SOMEHOW - and put them in some kind of 'beauty order'. This would mean insane network and computation power they'd need, especially if the time limit is 'less than a year'. They would have to: - Find every single girl in the world - Find out what every single girl in the world looks like - Find out where every single girl in the world lives in - Find out the names of every single girl in the world (for reference and bookkeeping purposes) - Find out how to gather, collect, arrange, categorize and save all this information into a usable database Then this database would have to be used to: - Compare every single girl in the world to everyone else - Make -something- decide who is more beautiful or less beautiful than another - List all the girls in beauty order - Make a definitive judgment (by whom, how?) as to who the MOST beautiful girl of all these girls are - Make sure the database didn't miss any girls, no matter how remote, private or gated community-type areas they might live in - Make sure their selection is the correct one, so it couldn't be done from photos or videos alone, but it would have to be confirmed 'by hand' (or at least by 'real-life appearance') - Make sure she really IS the most beautiful, meaning they would have to check EVERY single girl above a certain 'beauty standard' by hand - Which would probably lead to them having to check every other girl as well, just to make sure they ARE at their assigned 'beauty level' - Make beauty a 'standardizable asset' that can be changed to cold numbers or at least have a consensus reached about by a trustworthy panel or jury of some kind (who, what?) "How many terminally ill people have you even met in your life?" A couple of points.. 1) People can't be 'terminally ill', as people can't die. Only the body dies, the human doesn't. Hence, only bodies can be 'terminally ill'. 2) We're all living in 'terminally ill' bodies - everyone's body in history has died, and everyone's body will die. Everyone reading this that is still in a physical body, will experience the death of that body sooner or later. It's just a matter of time. What does it matter if it's two weeks or 200 years? Your body will die and you will then be transported to live in a completely different environment, completely different lifestyle than you did on your temporary visitation on this crummy planet. See you on the other side, where I don't have a charlimit and can explain a lot more.. Egyptian government doesn't like it when people do it. https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/russian-photographer-apology/index.html Seems that people do it anyway.. "-kill the most beutiful woman in the world - grandchild" What did you miss, you ask? You missed either a typo you made or a terrible thought you wrote down. "These are everyday people," Um.. a black mechanic that 'knows everything' (can it ever be otherwise in politically correct movies?) and a super rich hospital owner? Yeah, EVERYDAY people... "No because you can't spare an hour thirty plus of your life to see two screen legends who when they will die will never be replaced as opposed to a bad acting schmuck like The Rock!" You assume quite a lot if you really think anyone that can't enjoy these particular old geezers shouting meaningless crap at each other somehow thinks 'The Rock' is a good actor, or even tolerable in any way in anything he's ever been in. I found this movie a solid 5 out of 10, a harmless 'meh' that just wastes your time without giving you anyting except telling the truth about who invented the radio. I also hate 'Rock' and all these modern mumbler-growlers that can't seem to be able to speak clearly in any movie. Back in the old days, people took care to have power, proper voice, volume and clarity when they spoke in movies. Now people mumble, growl, whisper or I don't even know what it should be called. Speak up, damnit! I don't mind time travel, space travel, teleportation, astral projection, spaceships, magical powers, and so on and so forth - but I do mind when small everyday details are shown completely unrealistically. I don't mind a cancer patient having sex in a private plane that's flying at a high altitude, but I do mind that a rich man would be forced by 'PR' (that he doesn't care about) to in any situation whatsoever be, and have to be, amongst the 'commoners'. That simply shatters the immersion immediately. It doesn't break my immersion if someone sees a vision of the future that then comes true, or reads someone's mind, or telekinetically throws a computer monitor at someone's face. But when a woman falls in love with a shy Linux nerd, that's when the immersion explodes to tiny pieces and I realize I am watching another agenda-ridden concoction of the politically correct lie-worshippers. It's no longer an enjoyable experience, it's just a movie. I don't quite get the point of this movie anyway, so I might not be qualified to talk about this, but.. ..it seems the message of this movie is: "When you find out your body will finally release you from this hellish prison people call Terra, and you only have to suffer this misery for less than a year (approximately), instead of preparing, creating and celebrating, you should give yourself completely to MINDLESS HEDONISM, because somehow that'll make your life 'worthwhile'". Eh.. skydiving? Why? What do you gain from that? So you get a memory of having done something 'extreme'. What does that do in the long run? You feel somehow better about yourself and your capabilities? I'd rather compose a song or create beautiful art than go mindlessly just defy gravity just to fall back to the ground anyway afterwards. It's like jumping up and down once, except in larger scale. It accomplishes exactly as much, too, except it wasted time you could've spent exploring or creating. Anyway, the original poster talks in a bit pompous and strange way - by 'fictions', I assume the OP means 'movies' or 'stories'. 'Realism' in entertainment is always an interesting concept. On one hand, the viewer needs it for immersion and for being able to relate to the characters. If everyone constantly acts, speaks and behaves completley unrealistically, it takes you out of the world of the story and makes you acutely aware you're just watching a movie or trying to experience a story. If it's 'too realistic', then it can become depressing and lose its escapistic possibilities and qualities, and fail to deliver any meaningful message. A movie has to strike a fine balance between 'everyday realism' that keeps you invested and immersed in the story, and 'fantastical elements' you can't experience in your actual life without watching a movie or playing a game or something like that, so you still get something inspiring and exciting out of the movie. View all replies >