In episode 17, when Commander Taggart is about to escape the neutron field in the omega-13, he used the auxiliary of deck B… But in the next episode, the schematic shows that deck has been totally vaporized. I was just wondering, do you think that’s a continuity error, or do you think there’s a justifiable reason for it?
This feels like a murderbot reference, but I haven’t read them all
Never give up, never surrender
You are our last hope.
deleted by creator
The whole last season of GOT.
Just rewarched on a TV in a background and it’s so bad. I thought maybe given some time it would clear up a bit as GOT hype died down but it’s just awful, can’t believe the actors managed to keep a straight face.
You can just watch the Pitch Meeting next time. Shorter and internally consistent.
Ant-Man
spoiler
The first Ant Man had this rule where any objects that are shrunk will stay as the weight they originally were. Yet Hank Pym carries around a shrunken tank on a keychain! Scandalous!
One can surmise it’s actually a life-sized model kit tank made out of cheap plastic, akin to how it works in Ground Defense Force! Mao-Chan.
But it drove through a concrete wall!
It’s a really well made toy tank?
Or a very badly made wall…
Tofu dreg construction, perhaps.
Wrll there is also a scene in one of the movies where a plastic thomas the tank engine toy gets huge and crushes a police car. The toy that should jot weigh more than 200g crushes a car …
I think one of the theories is that Hank doesn’t actually know how Pym particles work and it’s basically magic. Because if you watch it keeping weight in mind none of it makes sense.
didn’t he “refine/improve” the process or something?
Comic book movies are cheating at this game.
Did they explain why in endgame a pym particles vial is only used once per person? While in other ant-man movies a vial of pym particles can be used multiple times.
Yes, they didn’t have enough left because Hank Pym was dusted.
Remember when Scott was about to test the time machine? They have 2 vials to use. He accidentally shrunk himself and he said they only have 1 left for the test. The 2 vials are full before they used it. He used a full vial of pym particles just to shrink down.
Because they have to shrink down to the quantum realm and come back. It uses more. It’s also never made clear how many particles are in the vials or if they’re full or how many a normal shrinking takes. But it is established multiple times that they have a limited supply and only enough to the job. Also, it’s a comic book movie.
Last Jedi:
Leia gives Rey a hand held tracking device and tells her that with it she will be able to find them wherever they go.
In THE SAME SCENE, they come out of Hyperspace followed by the First Order and claim it’s impossible to have followed them.
The tracking plot point is not mentioned again.
(p.s. A similar tracker was placed on board the Falcon in the OG Star Wars to lead the Death Star to the rebel base on Yavin 4).
The plot point is that you cannot be tracked while in hyperspace. Something the first order was able to do so they could follow them to their destination instead of waiting until they are out of hyperspace to pursue them.Trackers are well established in the universe otherwise. They just only work outside of hyperspace.
Last Jedi was so angering that it killed all desire I had for watching rise of Skywalker, rise was the only star wars movie I’ve ever skipped, and still haven’t watched.
When instead of sacrificing ackbar, they kill him in the background and we’re supposed to care about the sacrifice of this random purple haired woman we’ve never ever met before and just shows up to die? Should have been ackbar or Leia or even wedge. And one thing I liked about TFA was the budding relationship between Rey and Finn, they had great chemistry. Then suddenly you separate them for the whole second movie, add a second love interest that’s awful and for some reason Rey likes Kylo? The fuck??
I feel really bad for Rise of Skywalker, it was really in an impossible position.
First, Last Jedi painted them into a fucking corner. It was like nobody told Johnson he was making the middle part of a trilogy.
Second, what little structure the trilogy had was 7 was about Solo, 8 was about Luke, and 9 would have been about Leia, but then Carrie Fisher up and died. :(
They had to really scramble on the 3rd one and losing the original writer/director didn’t help. Abrams had to come in after 8 shit the bed and Fisher died and tried to make the best of it…
In The Matrix, humans were used as batteries. The energy requirements needed by a body to sustain itself outweigh feeding it to extract energy. It would’ve been more efficient to burn the food directly instead of feeding it to people.
Originally it was humans being used for their brains as processing units, but they thought thatd be too confusing for audiences so they went with batteries.
kingsman movie, first one. he did some parkour in the beginning to get away front bullies, then never again.
lessons in chemistry. crazy contraption to feed the dog, then never again anything like it.
Those scenes are just there to establish that he’s capable, intelligent and talented in the ways the agency needs, so it’s plausible they would recruit him. Never-mind that they also establish the way he looks at the world and approaches problems which is then forgotten immediately.
The ending to Castle. A series that went on for eight seasons, where they were given several warnings about how the actors (who didn’t get along) might quit and challenge production, and then it happens, and instead of preparing a proper ending or deciding to recast Beckett, they had the characters win against the mafia, then randomly die because the writers are absolutely obsessed with cliffhangers, then randomly be brought back to life, then randomly turn it into a Wizard of Oz type of ending with kids we’ve never seen before, all because they stalled writing an ending until the very last moment. As much as people blame Stana Katic for leaving and throwing a wrench into things, you can’t say the writers didn’t have some kind of hand in how things turned out. Every possible thing that could’ve fixed the show was voluntarily ignored.
Worth it for this:
I like to think this is their way of confirming the two universes are canon and that the characters are subconsciously aware.
Huh, I might have to watch that again. It was one of my favorite seres, but back then I was stuck watching on the networks schedule, so I never finished it
Lost. All of it.
Abed:
It’s the first season of Lost on DVD.Pierce:
That’s the meaning of Christmas?Abed:
No. It’s a metaphor. It represents lack of pay-off.[…]
Abed:
I get it. The meaning of Christmas is the idea that Christmas has meaning. And it can be whatever we want. For me, it used to mean being with my mom. Now it means being with you guys. Thanks, Lost.Frustrated they never showed the polar bears backstory including his work as a scientist with a gambling problem and a fractured relationship with his son.
Walt?
Pawse…Breaking Bear?
The whole UFO scene in “Life of Brian”.
Claudette:
He’s always bugging me about my house. Fifteen years ago, we agreed, that house belongs to me. Now the value of the house is going up and he’s seeing dollar signs. Everything goes wrong at once. Nobody wants to help me, and I’m dying.
Lisa:
You’re not dying, mom.
Claudette:
I got the results of the test back. I definitely have breast cancer.
Lisa:
Look, don’t worry about it. Everything will be fine. They’re curing lots of people every day.
Claudette:
I’m sure I’ll be alright.
Looper when they’re “torturing” the one guy and his body parts are disappearing one after another.
To clarify, do you mean it wouldn’t make sense that his body part would dissapear as they were severed in an alternative past. Or do you mean it doesn’t belong on the plot/add to the story?
The first. Those injuries were done decades ago, and yet they are just appearing now to the surprise of the character.
If that’s how the time travel “works” in this universe somehow, then Bruce Willis disappearing at the end contradicts this.
The whole Looper premise doesn’t make sense.
Criminals in the future send people back in time to get whacked. If you get an abnormally large payout, that means you whacked your future self and are now retired.
Why have someone kill themselves with a large payoff? Why retire them? If they’re retired in the future, why have them killed?
You have present day hitmen, A, B, and C. Future victims, a, b, and c.
A -> a, B -> b, C -> c results in stupid large payouts and retired killers.
A -> b, B -> c, C -> a has normal payoffs and no retirements.
Still doesn’t explain why you wanted a, b, and c dead in the first place.
Looper is a great LOOKING movie, those shotguns were on point! Just don’t go thinking about it for more than 5 minutes.
Their concept of time travel is definitely unorthodox compared to other time travel movies. One of the main characters literally said not to think too much about it.
Everything else was pretty much explained by the protag.
He did mentioned that his line of work doesn’t attract forward thinking people. This is quite realistic, I mean, have you seen how a lot of people (and companies) sacrificed long term benefits for short ter ones? It’s also posible that they think they can beat that system.
Their future selves are killed to tie up loose ends. The change in power dynamic with Rainmaker’s takeover definitely plays a role. This is actually a common trope in crime dramas (and probably also in real world).
It definitely is not a perfect movie, but it’s a damn good one to me. I definitely think Joseph-Gorden Lewitt and Emily Blunt lack chemistry, and the sex scene was forced, but I guess it’s somewhat realistic someone living in a farm out of nowhere all by themselves can get so horny…
The part that pisses me off. “We can’t kill people in the future because the forensics are too good.” Then armed men come for him in the future. They can’t kill him or they’ll get caught, why are the guns a threat?
Can still shoot him? Could be stupid and kill him anyway?
Still sucks to die even if they get caught
I didn’t like that movie, but do people really analyse movies like this as their watching them? I don’t usually unless I’m really bored, or afterwards if I really liked it.
I’m trained in literary analysis and criticism, so, yeah, I’ll sit there thinking “well, lets see how they explain this…”
The best fiction actually does.
Have you watched Primer?
Primer is excellent, and a great double feature with The Fountain.
The #1 thing to know about the Fountain though is that it’s super hard to get unless you read the companion graphic novel.
The biggest one for me is in Butterfly effect, when he goes back in time and gives himself the scars, it goes against everything we learned about time travel in that movie. If he did that he would have had the scars all along, they would not have appeared out of thin air, also the timeline would have diverged there.
In the same vein, in looper where they start crippling the past version of a person and the future one who is running away from something gets starts stumbling more and more until he can’t walk, but the first few hundred meters he still made somehow.
But that is internally coherent from what I remember. I.e. time always works that way, changes in the past are propagated, and time travelers get the effects sometime after it.
Ah maybe it is. I don’t remember it very well anymore. Then it wouldn’t be a bad scene and more of a bad overall setup.
In Rock ‘n’ Roll High School Forever, the scene where they go over to someone’s house and pretend to worship their refrigerator doesn’t further the plot or character development in any way.
The scene where Al Pacino gets slapped by a big black guy wearing only a cowboy hat and a jockstrap in Cruising (1980)
This Scene from Designated Survivor. I’m still chuckling when thinking about it.
😂
