MovieChat Forums > Alerra > Replies
Alerra's Replies
It's a compilation of the little things: Luke knows Obi-Wan. He has Force abilities. He shows up with the R2 and 3PO, who were last seen over Tattooine. His name is Skywalker (is the name so common that a lot of other people have it? Why don't we hear about them?). Those little clues add up. They're probably what caused Palpatine to figure it out. Vader believed Padme's baby to have died with her, so he wasn't expecting Luke to be his son, but how does he not wonder if they're related in some way?
There's 32 years in between Phantom and A New Hope, not 19.
10 years between TPM and AOTC
3 years between AOTC and ROTS
19 years between ROTS and ANH
Alec Guinness was 63 in 1977, but let's make him a year younger at the time of filming. For argument's sake, we'll make Obi-wan the same age. If he's 62 in ANH, that would make him 30 in TPM. Ewan McGregor was 26 in 1997, but again, we'll subtract another year to account for production time. So that's a five year difference in age, not 20.
It works because it emphasizes just how bad things have gotten for Anna at that point. Think about everything Anna has lost.
Elsa. Olaf. Her belief and faith in her history and what she's been taught about her kingdom. She has no idea if she'll ever make it home again. And she knows that if she does what she knows she has to do, she'll lose Arandale. She is in a straight-up DARK PLACE. If the film had gone right from Gale blowing Olaf into a tidy pile outside the cave to Anna climbing out and staring at the dam, we would not have been quite so aware of how completely devastated she was.
It also shows us her thought process. We know what she has to do because of her last conversation with Olaf. But that was before she LOST Olaf (or Elsa). Even though we know she has to destroy the dam, we don't know if she will actually have the strength to do it. The song ends on a (sort of) hopeful note -- that she'll keep on doing what's right, even when nothing in her life will ever be the same. There's an important lesson in that for all of us.
It was the storyline about Weaver's baby that seemed far-fetched for me. We have all these episodes about Sandy's family screaming, "IT'S SANDY'S BABY, NOT YOURS!" And then we actually get to the courthouse, and they're, "We just want to make sure you keep us a part of his life." Bull. That's not what you all were screaming for the past month of episodes.
And don't get me started about the scene where they're chasing Abby all around the ER while she's looking for Weaver because they think she's helping Weaver hide the baby.
I wouldn't sat I *hated* it, but it's definitely one that I don't enjoy nearly as much as some of the others (Voyage Home, Wrath of Khan, First Contact).
I couldn't get into Sybok, as a villain or otherwise. He was too fanatical to be a good guy, and he wasn't...villainous enough to be the bad guy. If I look at Chang or Khan or Kruge, I see a villain I love to hate. But with Sybok, I just feel annoyed.
I think the main issue for me (I can't speak for others) is that it tried to be too many things. It goes deep (confronting one's pain, meeting "God"), but there were too many lighthearted moments for it to be taken seriously (Yosemite, Spock's boots). And don't get me started on Uhura's dancing or Kirk's canonical brother.
There were some good parts to it (Yosemite!), and it did at least have a little action (unlike the Motion Picture), but if I were to rank all the TOS movies, this one would not rank very high.
Also, the fact that it's in black and white provides an awesome trivia fact. How many movies can say they put chocolate syrup in a shower?
The short answer? Because Forrest, with his childlike innocence, always took people at their word and believed Jenny when she said he was the father.
The precise answer is a bit more in depth. Jenny shows up at Forrest's house. She lives for a while there, and we don't ever see her with any other man. We don't know exactly how long she stays, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's at least long enough to know that she wouldn't have been pregnant with anyone she had been with before she arrived.
She sleeps with Forrest the night before she leaves. We don't know exactly where she goes at this point. We know she eventually ends up in Savannah, but not whether she goes straight there or stops at other places first. The next time we see her, she's watching Forrest on the news because of his running. She's at work at this point. We think this is a throwaway scene, shown just to prove how big of a story Forrest's running was, but it actually tells us something about her. Up until this point, Jenny has modeled for a porn magazine, performed at a strip club, panhandled, and done who-knows-what with who-knows-whom. This time, though? She's working as a waitress. Maybe not the most glamorous job out there, but certainly respectable. For the first time in her life, we see Jenny doing something to support herself that provides a regular income and doesn't involve drugs, sex or prostitution.
We don't know if this is before or after Little Forrest was born. Jenny is not noticeably pregnant. But the scene shows that she's turned her life around. So we don't just have Jenny's word that Little Forrest is Forrest's son. The cinemaphotography and directing tell us this too.
That might not actually be as big of an anachronism as we may think. Arguably the quickest way to ruin your teeth is a diet heavy with sugar COMBINED with improper dental care. Sugar is a New World crop, so no one in Egypt would have had access to it. Since both fruit and honey would have been expensive, a diet for an ancient Egyptian or Israelite would have been significantly less sweet.
Different strokes for different folks. It's a lighthearted chic flick with romance and family drama. And it's relatively clean, even in its drama. It's ok if you didn't enjoy it, but that doesn't mean no one can.
And just to point out, John Corbett may not be George Clooney or Brad Pitt when it comes to fame, but he did win an Emmy and has been nominated for multiple Golden Globes. He might not be your definition of a movie star, but he's not a nobody in Hollywood.
The hand job was when he visits her in college. Little Forrest is supposed to be conceived later when Jenny is staying with Forrest after his mom dies. Jenny comes to him, says she loves him, and the two of are shown in bed together. Jenny then leaves the next morning.
Jenny had been staying with Forrest for a while at that point, so let's assume she hadn't been with anyone else during that time. And if the reason she leaves is because she realizes she loves him too much to marry him before she can live on her own two feet, loving herself (this is not explicitly stated, but it makes sense), then she probably wasn't with anyone else afterwards either.
True. Very few people would have been exclusively homosexual. The concept of homosexuality that we have today -- of a person who is romantically or sexually attracted to a person of the same gender and considers entering into monogamous, long-term relationship with said person didn't exist seven hundred years ago (or four hundred, or two hundred, or even one hundred). People viewed homosexual sex as specific act that a person chose to commit (or not). The idea of being exclusively homosexual because you were simply born that way was a foreign concept.
Edward II, James VI/I, Philippe of Orleans -- it's possible that they all would have been exclusively homosexual today. But in their times, they would have been expected - as heirs to their families - to marry and produce children. They all understood that their duty to their countries came first, regardless of who they preferred in the bedchamber. And in this regard, they succeeded. Every English monarch since is descended from Edward (including James). And if they ever bring the monarchy back to France, it will be given to Philippe's descendants.
And again, Braveheart didn't make up the idea that Edward preferred men, or that Isabella was unfaithful. It's true that many historians have debated Edward's sexuality, but they've been doing it for centuries. And Isabella DID mess around (but not with Wallace).
I personally love TDAT, but not for its science/disaster scenes. I watch that movie mainly for the library scenes. I memorized the librarian's line about the printed word being mankind's greatest achievement (Yes. I'm a book geek.)
The fact that Edward II fathered children with Isabella is not an indication of his sexuality. Many people historically believed to be homosexual (and probably would be out and proud in present times) were in heterosexual marriages with children. Some used marriage as a cover; some were married to continue the family name. Philippe, Duke of Orleans (the brother to Louis XIV), was a flaming homosexual, but he still married (twice) and fathered multiple children.
Hugh Despenser was almost certainly homosexual -- there are extant historical documents corroborating his preferences in the bedroom. And while he is not present here, he was once referred to as "the king's husband," so there were probably plenty of rumors floating around. People didn't suddenly start wondering about Edward's sexuality in 1995.
Moana was probably more likeable -- her goal is to save the world, and she does it in a selfless manner, and in the process helps others around her (notably Maui and her father) become more open minded and better people.
But Merida is definitely more *relatable*. She's a whiny teenager who talks back to her mom and complains about her life. And the main conflict is something we all can relate to. She has to fix her own screw up and admit to herself that she's been selfish. How many of us HAVEN'T been whiny teens who talked back to our moms and complained about our lives at one point or another, or had to admit that we've majorly screwed up? Also - say what you want about it, but those of us who frequently have bad hair days or have to spend an hour on curls can really relate to her unruly hair.
Georg Von Trapp was 58 at the time of the Anschluss.
Have you ever read any of Douglas Preston? Craig might not be Hercule Poirot, but Aloysius Pendergast, he might just be. Every time Blanc started speaking, all I could think of was, "OMG, that's Pendergast." The accent, the cadence, the lines of questioning, everything.
A lot probably was exaggerated, but Mary Jackson really did have a similar experience regarding the bathrooms. She happened to ask a few white coworkers where the restroom was, and their response was basically, "Why would we know where YOUR bathroom is?" (like Kevin Costner's secretary does in the movie). She happened to run into Kazimierz Czarnecki (Karl Zielinski in the movie) right afterwards. He asked her how her day was going, and she ranted about the bathrooms to him. Upon which he said, "So why don't you just come and work in my department?"
Why, in the movie, they had to change that to Katherine Johnson yelling to her supervisor, and to Jackson getting the job with the wind tunnel because Vivian Mitchell asks Dorothy Vaughn for a name, I don't know.
Actually from what has been written about Kazimierz Czarnecki (the Karl Zielinski character), he and Jackson really did have a good working relationship right from the get-go. He was the one who actually recruited Jackson to come and work for him -- in person -- after SHE (not Katherine Johnson) ranted about the lack of available restrooms. They would go on to co-author several papers together, and Jackson eventually organized his retirement party in 1979. So despite how many African Americans were (and are still) treated by many people, Czarnecki and Jackson clearly got along well together.
Also, keep in mind that in 1912, radios weren't manned as efficiently, and sextants were barely used at all after dark (this are two of the many problems the Titanic actually had). We didn't have an accurate location of exactly where she sunk, because a ship's navigator would usually take a final reading of their location at sundown, then another one in the morning. So when we see Captain Smith in the radio room, handing the message to Jack Phillips, the coordinates he writes down are pretty much him guessing how far they had come in the previous four hours (sunset at that latitude in mid-April is around 8pm).
The Carpathia would have taken a reading the next morning, but given how far apart the the lifeboats were from each other, and that they had been told to row away from the ship, we don't know how exact it might have been in relation to the Titanic's final position.
A more burning question for me would be "how did none of the prison guards notice the shoes?" Those shoes look different. They would have SOUNDED different. Not one of the guards noticed anything?
When Red brings it up later, my very first thought was, "seriously? you don't look at a person's shoes?"