MovieChat Forums > tatsujin > Replies
tatsujin's Replies
Yeah, they're obviously very different from each other.
I guess they must mean in a genetic sense, as in clones?
Could also be something that only exists in Star Wars, like a "force clone" (which I totally made up) or whatever.
No that was, surprisingly enough, completely ignored, being the whole premise from the get go.
I was thinking it maybe was because of the bullet being introduced? Metal (and stuff) did obviously interact with the process somehow (e.g. they arrive at their destination with nothing).
Also, the idea of symmetry; he returned 4 days after (as well as before), so we can only assume he will also appear three more times, symmetric to his 1890, 1941 and 2023 appearances. Also, he might even appear many other years, like a 1000 years before (and after). I mean, why four?
I interpreted her being there (and the KYAL logo visible, already in 2023), that their efforts changed very little and that she had jumped to 2023 in a new mission to change things.
Of course, all this being an attempt at a cliff-hanger, potentially a tie-in to a second season. Thankfully, that doesn't seem to be happening (fingers crossed).
That's so you know it's in the past. /s
It depends mostly on what kind of "knock" it received. From months (a really generous knock) to centuries.
It could also never reach earth, but instead get a more elliptical orbit around us.
Should mention I'm nowhere near knowledgable in orbital mechanics.
Didn't they inject him with some bad stuff to kill the "aliens"? I think they assumed he'd also be dead.
Seconded.
I've just watch both versions, almost back to back and I agree. The few things the US version added/changed was not for the better.
The ambiguity of the ending in the DK version had enough hints, an explanation was not needed.
Also, in the DK version towards the end where Iben is talking to Asger, thinking about jumping (forgot what she said exactly). That part was surpriusingly vague in the US version, where she just said (paraphrased) "I'm gonna go and be with Oliver". Also the sound in the DK version when the call ended it sounded like falling quickly towards the traffic (hinting at jumping), whereas in the US version the call simply cuts off. Is jumping off of bridges also too stomach-turning for US viewers?
And the baby surviving at the last minute felt like a copout... "aaand everyone's fine, yay!".
Yeah, it was a bit contrived. The injection didn't seem to be necessary for the actual time travel, or vice versa.
One possibility might be that it was a power trip; he could just sit in his office and just click the "die"-buttons.
So year, if she just woul've kill them the "old-fashined" way, no one would've noticed (and thus, no movie).
I think, probably after a few days of starving, I'd try riding the platform down.
It was kind of a hole in the logic of the whole system: why not just ride the platform down? Valid option from any floor, really.
From an outside perspecite, going up or down doesn't really imply better or worse. The association of "better" with "up" was made solely because of the food being passed downwards becoming more and more scarce. Discarding that, it's just a bunch of floors where, frankly, going down seems like the better option.
The relation is even thinner as Olga is a slavic name. So yeah, he was just being a prick.
A bit late here perhaps. :)
They're not (only) flashbacks. At least some of them are from Jo's novel, I think.
The parts from Jo's novel have more color, making them a bit "dreamy", or something. But the effect is quite subtle and confused the hell out of me.
What confused me the most was when Beth died (or not?).
First (saturated) we see Jo waking up by the bed, beth gone, fearing she was dead only to find her at the kitchen table, alive. Also there's like a christmas prep scene and their father comes home (and there was much rejoycing). Next scene (non-saturated), Jo waking up again in the same manner as before, only now Beth is apparently dead (judging by their reactions).
Next scene is a burial, presumably Beth's, without dialog. *Immediately* after this there's a wedding (saturated) scene, where Beth is alive again. This is quite a long sequence (adding to the confusion), where also Jo is "dumping" Laurie. Next scene again (non-saturated), Beth is dead (again), where Jo and her mother is packing Beth's things. This time she stays dead (I think)...
Also, the presumed novel-bits is not indicated as such in any way other than slightly more saturated colors. For example, there's no narration, which is sometimes used in these circumstances. I thought the saturation was so slight I interpreted it as simply different time of day.
Another thing about Jo waking up at Beth's bed (when she really is dead): No-one thought to wake Jo up while this was happening!?!
https://www.redonline.co.uk/red-women/news-in-brief/a33829200/kate-winslet-ammonite-sex-scenes/
Ok, I just thought that the guy in the beginning probably was real. She gets killed by him and she incorporates his hand markings into her "dying dream".
This still leaves the daughter detail, though...
That was one of my theories as well. It's basically the only way that fits with the ending, somewhat, meaning that she dies.
However, it fits weirdly with e.g. the way she discarded her daughter for "the way"... unless you interpret the discarding as her coming to terms with whatever happened to the daughter, which is kind of a stretch.
It also doesn't quite explain the beginning of the movie, getting picked up by the guy, unless that was just in her head as well, but then the whole movie kind of falls apart, I think.
I think this movie showed potential. The setup could've lead to many interesting resolutions, but I think the ending did throw most of those interpretations out the window...
> PLUS she also eats that IMAGINARY LOOKING HOLOGRAPHIC APPLE 🍎 there inside of that GARDEN
Are you referring to the tomato Zephyr is eating in that hydroponics lab? (and what is imaginary-looking?)
Don't remember any other scenes where she's eating something like that...
This was unsettling, to say the least. A clear downward spiral for the "pro"-tagonists, unable to stop its progress...
What I liked about it was that there was no clear "villain". Sebestian had serious issues, but his dad wasn't really a positive influence either... All the people around them also saw that things were seriously awry but did nothing, or were at least too late to do anything (hindsight is 20/20).
Trying to not spoil it, I didn't like that the court/police completely missed a crucial detail regarding how things went down (e.g. during the reconstruction), a detail they could've easily discovered.
Strictly speaking I never mentioned anything about war. War is usually a conflict (a disagreement if you will) between nations or in the "space-future" between worlds.
In neither of the movies I mentioned was there any "war". Invasion by a superior (alien) force is arguably not a conflict. This was about survival.
The jive in this movie about war felt more like a poetic slogan by the film makers, similar to the "war" in War of the Worlds. It's basically marketing, it sounds better.
About the discovery in ID; that was way after they incited rebellion. It came later and made it possible to defeat the aliens.
The movie Signs is also another good example of ill-prepared moron aliens, even more so than War of the Worlds.
The TV show "Falling Skies" is also a typical example of "futile resistance". That show went on for far too long, however :(
Regarding the "insurmountable advantage": this usually doesn't stop people from trying. After all, the alternative is oppression, misery and death. In general, people usually tend to not prefer this.
And also, I suppose you haven't seen War of the Worlds, Independence Day, or any of the other countless movies that have similar story lines?
But I agree, if realism is to be served, the resolution to all of those movies (i.e. human victory) are highly unlikely. Except maybe War of the Worlds, where the aliens are simply ill-prepared morons.