Off Topic The Official:TV-Show-Movie-Games Thread

It looks ****.

 

think Donga meant you might have the most up to date news on RHC

 

I didn't read it properly

Unfortunately I have no news, he was texting back and fore for a while then went quiet and stopped answering. I'll text him now and see if he replies.

 

So I watched Barbie (cause a: its on Sky and I don't have to pay to watch it b: wanted to see what the fuss was about)

Well tbh it is rather an mediocre film. At no point does it successfully combine the serious message it is trying to put across with the playfulness of a film about a child's toy. It is either too silly or too in your face message.
And the middle of the film is frankly boring.
But it is visual it is impressive and the acting is on a whole pretty good.

The Lego movie proves you can make a proper film about a toy, but this doesn't get anywhere near that.
I'd say Barbie is a 5.5, 6 at best, and anything above that you've probably bought into the advertising.

 

Mrs luv will watch tonight. I'll pass.

 

Not seen the Barbie movie but have some Barbie facts. The original Barbie dolls were based on the figures of a "German sex doll named Lilli" wasn't actually a doll men had sex with, but was one used to promote scandalous headlines etc and had its own "blue" cartoons ..

Barbie and Ken were the names of the founders children. Barbie and Ken were brother and sister... So Barbie dolls are incestuous. The original plans for the Ken doll was for him to be anatomically correct.

I'm assuming the movie is full of incest.

 

Yeah that bit isn't true
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild_Lilli_doll

Just a German version of Barbie. The comic strip the German doll came from was a risque comic (for the time), but nothing porn like. And it's unclear if Handler knew about the comic as she took inspiration from the doll for children

The other bit, Yes Barbie and Ken were named after Handlers children. Not sure where 'Named After' implies incest. People name stuff after other stuff all the time. I mean they're fictional characters.

All this from a 5 minute wiki

 

I don't think he actually meant it. I wouldn't take seriously most things Milk says - in fact I think he himself is a fictional character.

 

She was used as a "symbol" of sexuality and pretty much treated like play boy bunny logo today. Sold at sex toy shops and given at bachelor parties.

https://time.com/3731483/barbie-history/

Newspapers would show a picture of her likeness when reporting on saucy stories. She absolutely was treated as a sex symbol, not a child's doll.

The incest thing was meant tongue in cheek. I don't think it has even been suggested Barbie herself has had sex even. It remains a child toy.

 

I am completely fictional. An AI bot ahead of my time

 

I've watched a four or five episodes of Fallout because it supposedly the big new show for amazon.

So...

Mediocre plot and dialogue.
A mix of fantastic special effects and some really cheesey 1980s Doctor Who level special effects. It's odd... Specifically thinking of "the head"(that shouldn't be too much of a spoiler) looked like something from a cheap Halloween story.

Some special effects they tried really hard to get right and obviously spent a lot of money on, and others it's like they didn't even care.

I think a lot of the humour misses the mark too which is sad since the source material is known for it's humour.

6/10. First couple of episodes I thought... This could get good right now, just meh, I'll give it more time, especially since some people are raving about it


Next few episodes realized it was not going to get better but figured I'm that far in, might as well finish as it wasn't terrible, just not great..

I suspect all the race reviews are just the video game fan boys... It's really just mediocre. Not bad, just not worth starting if you haven't.

 

Oppenheimer

So disclaimer first. It's going to sound like I hated the film, actually I enjoyed it and found it very interesting. It is just that it could have been better, a classic even.


So the good first: Well acted and directed. Cinematography is excellent and the film creates a mood. Overall it's a very interesting and for a long film it doesn't seem long.


The negatives:

For a film about a huge scientific moment in history there is very little science in the film, the bomb sort of just gets developed and built after a few discussions. The film is far more concerned about Oppenheimer's personal and political life, which seems a bit of a wasted opportunity.

There are 3 (almost 4) concurrent running storylines, it's a little much.
1: Oppenheimer's life upto the deployment of the bomb. This is the main story.
2: Oppenheimer being investigated as a communist, this connects to 1.
3: Strauss's senate confirmation
4: I say almost 4 cause it connects 2 & 3, but it gets lost in all the other parts. It is however key as it is about Oppenheimer's regrets and his confrontation with Strauss.

The film is also alittle bit montagey. Scenes are very short (aside from the bomb testing), and it never really gives the characters a chance to settle and have deep moments. It also means that alot of the side characters pop in and out only when needed, so alot of names and faces that are very important but only have brief moments in the film.


Like I say I did enjoy the film, overall I'd give it an 8/10

 

Good summary, it had been hyped and like you I enjoyed but I wouldn't watch it again.