MovieChat Forums > e3e34ifj > Replies
e3e34ifj's Replies
I just watched it and I think you're onto something with the "some things are just beyond our understanding" notion. Maybe the plants aren't meant to be taken literally. However, I think Shyamalan was confused by his own message or something. There are quite a few shots where the plants are ominious, like one shot at the end where the trees move in the wind almost like Kaiju monsters.
I think maybe what Shyamalan was going for was that there IS an explainable understanding as to why the Happening happened, but us humans are too stupid to recognize ourselves as the problem. The shots with the nuclear powerplant is my main evidence here. I think Shyamalan was also going for a "love conquers all" message; people seem to die most often when they're angry or frustrated, like the group arguing in the field, the two teens, and the mentally ill old lady. The gas seems to spare people when they're acting out of love, like the married hippie couple who ultimately get shot by the soldier, and the scene at the end. Even John Leguizamo seems normal at first, and he was trying to calm a stranger down when the gas hit. But there's also a few times where this seems inconsistent so who knows.
I think maybe the idea is that God, or some 'unexplained phenomena' gave plants the ability to act in self-defense for a day before taking it away.
I'm voting for someone who's actually level-headed and not a mindless bully.
For anyone but Trump
I agree, it's certainly some of his finest music. This, Vampires, and Prince of Darkness are some of his best scores that often get overshadowed by Halloween.
It was only rude to someone who's mentally ill or extremely insecure. Either way, she did not have to treat the interviewer so poorly. I mean, who gets offended when someone asks you if you liked wearing the period piece outfits for a movie? "I wonder if she'd (the interviewer) ask the men if they liked wearing the clothes? Hmm, probably not." Cmon, how insecure.
He was big on the indie comedy scene for about a decade, and was considered one of Aussie/New Zealand's best directors. Then he broke into the American mainstream with Thor: Ragnorok and quickly skyrocketed to the top because he already had a huge overseas fanbase that was now combined with the massive MCU fanbase. I agree that Jojo Rabbit is good but nowhere near one of the best films of the decade, or of all time, but I imagine a lot of that admiration just came from Waititi fans ready to accept the film no matter what. But after that, it became apparent that he was just a sellout and a one-trick pony.
Just imagine an alternate timeline Wes Anderson who, after making Life Aquatic, decided to make Batman Begins or something, then began acting in everything before going back to his quirky indie movies, except in this timeline everyone grows to hate Anderson because they're sick of seeing him.
Oh yeah, love the way she's always so passive-aggressive and overanalyzes normal questions as insults. Very sweet person indeed.
She's been very spiteful and vindictive lately and most of it appears like it's her fault. Like accusing the director of It Ends With Us of "fat shaming" when he clearly wasn't, even from her account.
Well, she has a bigger butt and nicer tits than Lively. She's also a much nicer person than Lively too. And a better actress.
You're totally right. This felt like a $5 million direct-to-demand action movie you'd find in the Walmart bargain bin. Could not believe this was a $65 million studio theatrical blockbuster. I do remember seeing one or two trailers in theaters before other movies, but I don't remember it coming out. What the hell happened to that money?
Carpenter has said he took the job because they paid him a massive paycheck, and because he always found Chase to be much funnier than most comedians like Akroyd or Belushi. He certainly went on to regret taking that check.
Did you go to college? Did you have dorms that were 95% full on Christmas day? No?
Because of gender and skin color??? LOL. So if they were two white males, you'd have no issues? Hmm, telling.
I remembered seeing him play live in his wheelchair, I thought that was awesome. RIP
Uh, I'm in college right now and have never heard of that. And I live in the same town I go to college in.
It's the best scene in the film, and the only scene where the tornado threat felt real. Every other time it's all fun and games, or spectacle.
I sure hope so. Imagine the alternate timeline where De Niro blew his brains out by accident because the armorer put a live bullet in the gun.
I draw the line at the "safety professionals" who owned the gun, loaded the gun with live ammo, handed it to someone who didn't know better and lied that the gun was filled with a blank. That's seriously not a problem to you???
You still don't seem to understand Baldwin's position.
Was Baldwin the owner of the gun? No. Did Baldwin load the gun himself? No.
Was Baldwin told the gun he was holding was "cold"? Yes. Was Baldwin told the gun was safe? Yes. Was Baldwin directed to aim the gun directly at the camera and pull the trigger? YES.
So, what, they just weren't supposed to get that shot? The POV shot of a gun aiming right at the camera has been done before several times. It's in all three Back To The Future movies, and Pulp Fiction. I totally understand the rule of never pointing a gun at another person, but you still seem to be under the impression that Baldwin was just goofing around on set or something. He was doing EXACTLY what he was told by the director, and a tragedy happened. He did not randomly decide to point a gun at pedestrians, he was aiming what he was told was a "cold gun" at the camera for a specific scene. And who's behind the camera? The director and DP, both of whom got shot. Not sure how many times that needs to be explained.
The person who put the bullet in the gun, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, and her boss, David Halls, who negligently mixed live ammo with blank rounds.