- Registrado
- 7 de Oct, 2014
Oh I don't fall for any of that stuff. The area is still fucked and will continue to be fucked for a long time.
...I just think the idea of radioactive pups getting a new home is cute.
-
🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
Oh I don't fall for any of that stuff. The area is still fucked and will continue to be fucked for a long time.
...I just think the idea of radioactive pups getting a new home is cute.
O
OB 946
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Yeah it's adorable. The new owners must be incredibly patient to take care of them.
- Registrado
- 30 de Sep, 2018
I'm not kidding when I say this should be required viewing in American High Schools.
This is without a doubt one of the best things HBO has ever produced
This is without a doubt one of the best things HBO has ever produced
- Registrado
- 1 de Feb, 2015
No need to spread anti-nuclear alarmism. The people who are interested enough to seek it out on their own are usually informed enough to know that nuclear power has a strong safety record, but if you make everybody watch it, the less informed will walk away with the wrong lesson learned regarding nuclear power.
- Registrado
- 30 de Sep, 2016
The 4th episode is one of the best things I've ever seen on TV (and in movies too, tbh). It's not as good as Breaking Bad's "Face Off" or "4 Days Out, but is almost there.
- Registrado
- 28 de Jun, 2018
Has anybody sensed an anti-Trump theme in the show?
The producer/writer says there is but I never sensed it. Also, he said in a podcast that the concept of the show was written before 2016 and is not purposely about politics today. I guess he changed his view to gain some clout.
More importantly, those in charge allowed the disaster to happen out of fear of the bullet and censorship of documents that predicted the disaster.
The producer/writer says there is but I never sensed it. Also, he said in a podcast that the concept of the show was written before 2016 and is not purposely about politics today. I guess he changed his view to gain some clout.
More importantly, those in charge allowed the disaster to happen out of fear of the bullet and censorship of documents that predicted the disaster.
- Registrado
- 31 de Ene, 2018
There is nothing resembling an anti-Trump theme in the show. How could there be, given the subject matter is so far removed from him? If you can't watch it without thinking of Donald Trump it's just because you can't do anything without thinking of Donald Trump.
By the way Stephen, you're a hack and all your endings suck.
- Registrado
- 18 de Ene, 2019
I think she also acts as Legasov's coscience? When she tells him to reveal everything at the conference in Vienna, while Scherbina is for omitting a few things and obtain an improved security for reactors from KGB, Legasov is conflicted between what is 'morally' right and what is right for his country in that period with that level of control and bureaucracy. And that takes us to the second point...
Yeah, I didn't see anything that could be classified as an anti-Trump sentiment. I see it more as a general critique about totalitarism, about hidings the flaws in the system at the cost of endangering human lives, about selfishness and arrogance (Dyatlov's superiors first thought was "How can I avoid the consequences of this accident to impact my job/position?"). IMHO it's not even anti-Russian, because we are also showed all the courage, the suffering and the struggles of the thousand of people who had to fix this mess,
- Registrado
- 13 de Sep, 2018
- Registrado
- 7 de Oct, 2014
Oh, it's fine. Whatever. They'll argue that anything is woke now if someone brings it up. If a couple of twitter comments is enough to ruin a whole show for you, I don't know what to tell you.
I'd rather have something of quality with last-minute "wokeness" confirmations than grating low-quality shit like Ghostbusters 2016 or whatever the hell that Batwoman trailer was.
I'd rather have something of quality with last-minute "wokeness" confirmations than grating low-quality shit like Ghostbusters 2016 or whatever the hell that Batwoman trailer was.
- Registrado
- 27 de Feb, 2019
Imagine my shock when tumblrinas are already "shipping" these IRL heterosexual people as "gay babehs".
- Registrado
- 31 de Ene, 2018
You're being crazily sensitive to dumb shit on twitter. If you're right wing how have you managed to live this long without learning to separate the artist from the art? Let me just spoiler this shit right now: Almost every piece of media you enjoy is produced by people like this. This is the prevailing culture there.
Secret Asshole
Expert in things that never, ever happened
Miembro del personal
⚡ Thunderdomer ⚡
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 18 de Ene, 2017
Its obvious the dude is going for woke points. There's absolutely nothing in the show relating to the Trump administration or "YASS QWKEEN SLAY". Its terminal Trump Derangement Syndrome of King and wanting that woke points for basically nothing. Since the series isn't woke at all. You can't have the dozens of scientists working with them as multiple characters, you need to boil that all down.
Also its not anti-nuke propaganda. Chernobyl is basically unique in terms of nuclear disasters. Thanks to the gross incompetence of the staff as well as the fatal flaw of the reactor (the positive feed-back loop when the shut-down is hit). Its also because their reactors weren't built as solidly, which is why it skyrocketed through the ceiling. Chernobyl could only have happened to the Soviet Union at that time period. It couldn't have happened anywhere else. As with most things USSR made, it was done fucking awful.
Besides, the series is basically staying true to history.
Also its not anti-nuke propaganda. Chernobyl is basically unique in terms of nuclear disasters. Thanks to the gross incompetence of the staff as well as the fatal flaw of the reactor (the positive feed-back loop when the shut-down is hit). Its also because their reactors weren't built as solidly, which is why it skyrocketed through the ceiling. Chernobyl could only have happened to the Soviet Union at that time period. It couldn't have happened anywhere else. As with most things USSR made, it was done fucking awful.
Besides, the series is basically staying true to history.
- Registrado
- 14 de Oct, 2013
One thing I forgot to mention is that I really like the droning dark ambient soundtrack of HBO's Chernobyl. It very much reminds me of Mark Morgan's soundtrack for Fallout 1 and 2.
It's because of the scenes where Dyatlov and the plant's administrators deny the fact that the reactor core is no more, despite their subordinates all saying the opposite and people feeling very visible effects of radiation poisoning. Trump's opponents compare Dyatlov's denial of the reactor's explosion to Trump's denial of climate change.
It's because of the scenes where Dyatlov and the plant's administrators deny the fact that the reactor core is no more, despite their subordinates all saying the opposite and people feeling very visible effects of radiation poisoning. Trump's opponents compare Dyatlov's denial of the reactor's explosion to Trump's denial of climate change.
- Registrado
- 22 de Ago, 2014
Speaking of diversity and other trigger words for woke people, I noticed this little gem while looking up articles on the series.
It probably means nothing, but I have a feeling he made this character deliberately female, instead of organically. No one would give a shit about it if he didn't turn his pulpit into grandstanding about Trump.
I like the series, but it has nothing to do with current events. It's based on the events that occurred over thirty-three years ago.
It probably means nothing, but I have a feeling he made this character deliberately female, instead of organically. No one would give a shit about it if he didn't turn his pulpit into grandstanding about Trump.
I like the series, but it has nothing to do with current events. It's based on the events that occurred over thirty-three years ago.
- Registrado
- 26 de Feb, 2019
When Chernobyl happened, we lived in the UP; I was just barely old enough to understand that what an atomic explosion was & had no clue about reactors.
We didn't have a TV at the time, only the shortwave set at our family's cabin, and actually caught the skip from several English broadcasts in Europe, well before anything came over the AM/FM band here.
My stepfather was with SAC at the time, so along with the adults all acting very serious, a lot of phone calls were made & received as information came across the airwaves.
The next couple of days later was when we bought a small TV set, and by then the TV news had picked up on it. I distinctly remember seeing a graphic of the fallout plume circling the globe, and painting all of the Great Lakes in red Soviet shit. One of my uncles had left a Geiger counter which still worked, and that thing speeding up the minute we walked outside scared the fuck out of me.
I don't think I went back outside for a week.
Secret Asshole
Expert in things that never, ever happened
Miembro del personal
⚡ Thunderdomer ⚡
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 18 de Ene, 2017
I don't think it really matters, but she's really the only female main character. I think he felt the need to balance it out, and if you're going to do that, its better to do it with an amalgam character than a historical one. And since you're doing an amalgam character, the sex really doesn't matter. Her lines of dialogue are basically interchangeable if she were male, which is basically what you want with a character. These are human beings, with human emotions.
To be honest, it feels like a good choice. It evens the cast out without it feeling inorganic. I know some people say it feels 'forced' but it doesn't to me. All the characters have their strengths and weaknesses. You think Scherbina is just a cunt, but he's just a political operative who has survived so long by being cautious and he genuinely wants to help once he finds out the intense gravity of the situation. Legoslav is stuck between a rock and a hard place, someone who doesn't want to navigate these waters. But is given an immense amount of power and authority, a crushing weight he isn't used to. And then you have Emily Watson (who is, yes, Legoslav's representation of his conscious. She's an amalgam character as well as a metaphor) she's free from this burden because she's operating on the outskirts and can act as his conscious. But as Scherbina says, its easy to do so when you're not the one facing the bullet.
So each of these characters have their respective strengths and weaknesses. And honestly, if I were writing this, I would have made the amlgam character a woman as well. 99% of the cast is men, which is historically accurate. Its ok to have one of the three mains and one of the three representations as a woman. Think of it like this.
You can picture Legoslav as the main, with Scherbina and Khomyuk as two sides of his soul, pulling at him in opposite directions. Scherbina represents the practical, fearsome nature of the party operative that is part of Legoslav. While Khomyuk represents the scientific, compassionate mind, truth at any cost portion of his soul. One male representation and one female representation. With Legoslav being in the middle. Its based on historical events, but it is still a drama and written like one.
So you have this triad, with Legoslav in the middle, Khomyuk on one side, Scherbina on the other. Both pulling at him in different directions. The only exception is Scherbina was a historical figure. But it is 100% Shakespearian in that Scherbina and Khomyuk are pseudo-metaphorical, serving as two sides of Legoslav's mind. If you think about it, what would you associate with pragmatism and shrewd survival? Male. Compassion and love for the people, truth at any cost? Female. I mean, narrative wise, these are archetypes. Really classic ones too. That's why you've got Emily Watson as the female character. Thinking about this through the standpoint whereby we're seeing the story unfold through Legoslav's eyes and his mind, that's what these two characters serve as. One male half, one female half, one full human being.
Nobody ever thinks of story-telling, just the culture war. Makes me so fucking sad. Everything boiled down to Trump derangement syndrome and "YAS QKWEEN". It isn't woke, the guy didn't just haphazardly include a female because his politics told him to do so. Emily Watson's character is female for very good reasons. One, there were female scientists. Two, to round out the cast since its all male and another perspective is important. Three, to act as a metaphor for Legsolav's compassion. Four, she's an amalgam character so sex didn't matter. The problem is nobody understands anything from a storytelling perspective anymore. He's most certainly using Emily Watson as I described her, as a literary and narrative device, serving as metaphor for Legoslav's compassionate side as well as the other scientists. The problem is reviewers don't understand storytelling anymore. They only understand this political narrative garbage. They don't know why Chernobyl is good. Its like their brains have lost the way to do this so creators don't have a choice but to go low-brow political because that's the only way people seem to want to engage with their media these days. At least reviewers and the fucktarded media as well as progtards.
If he said that Emily Watson was a narrative device and metaphor and her sex really didn't matter (it doesn't, but she's female because she represents Legoslav's compassion and conscious, a classic feminine literary archetype from ancient fucking Greece), he'd get called a fucking sexist from dawn till dusk. But if he goes, "Yeah, I made her female because women are awesome" he gets "YAS QKEEEN SLAY" and none of the headache from fucking mongoloid re.tards who don't understand a story. So I see his point if he explained it that way. He is definitely keenly aware of the climate. I mean, maybe he did do it because of 'wokeness' but the narrative seems too complex for that simple explanation, and its easier these days to treat the media as re.tarded children than give them the accurate explanation for things.
It most certainly doesn't have anything to do with current events. Just the usual, dude trying to gain woke points on Twitter. The problem is we're boiling all of our interactions down to this. You have to look at how this guy wrote it. The way he tells the story. The narrative is compelling because of how he tells it, and how Legoslav is a Shakespearean figure. The whole thing plays out like a Shakespeare play. A tragedy about madness. Its got a fuckton of Shakespearean influences.
Its got far more in common with Hamlet or Othello than it does with Donald fucking Trump and climate change. This fucking shit makes me nauseous. How this guy accepts his interwoven, complex narrative, with breathtaking cinematography (fuck me, STALKER and Fallout, beautiful), the droning soundtrack, to this one note "HURR ORANGE MAN BAD" & "YASSS QKWEEN" to mongoloids on Twitter I will never fucking understand.
Última edición:
- Registrado
- 31 de Ene, 2018
I can compare it to anything I want, it doesn't mean any part of it was written or acted with that in mind.
Soviet women were expected to work because the state hates nuclear families. There was nothing progressive about it. Or wait maybe I just contradicted myself.
In any case that statement is retarded. This is the state that invented Lysenkoism, that believed in Lamarckian evolution, and in this particular context classified scientific papers that implied their infrastructure wasn't perfect. Them having a higher percentage of female doctors, if it's even true, is completely fucking irrelevant. It's just historical trivia. But these types do only tend to care about appearances and tokenism.