Estás usando un navegador desactualizado. Es posible que no muestre este u otros sitios web correctamente. Deberías actualizar o usar un navegador alternativo.
I got like half way through the video and realized they weren't actually saying anything. I turned it off soon after. If they want to glaze a film, fine, but at least make it interesting and have something to say
I'm not subbed anymore and just binge the re:views(and similar videos with unnecessarily different titles) I'm interested in like twice per year and ignore everything else. Works out pretty well.
I'm an idiot, please elaborate.
After watching RLM criticize new Star Trek for some time, which has been getting worse and worse, I got the impression that they actually do have some standards. Even setting aside the disastrous casting, Odyssey is simply horribly filmed. And the fact that it’s being praised so enthusiastically and unabashedly is, no matter how you look at it, nothing short of baffling.
I think the review resulted from Mike and Jay feeling obligated to make a thirty minute video for a summer blockbuster they ended up not feeling very strongly about one way or another, where normally an underwhelming viewing would relegate it to being mentioned in their end-of-year catch up video where they can afford to be honest without receiving death threats from Redditors. So they phoned in something to put out there while people are still falling for clickbait generated by a film that primarily has being fodder for Reddit politicization going for its word-of-mouth.
That's how hype works. Just look at Mike and Jay's Force Awakens and Marvel slop reviews from years past. They don't revisit films for the sake of coming away with revised opinions - They just pretend that they never said what they said.
I'm an idiot, please elaborate.
After watching RLM criticize new Star Trek for some time, which has been getting worse and worse, I got the impression that they actually do have some standards. Even setting aside the disastrous casting, Odyssey is simply horribly filmed. And the fact that it’s being praised so enthusiastically and unabashedly is, no matter how you look at it, nothing short of baffling.
This is old money Hollywood's last stand trying to prove that they "still got it" and just like nearly every other major tentpole since Endgame, it will fall flat on its surgically enhanced face. We are going through something similar to what happened in the 70s with directors like William Friedkin (RIP you magnificent bastard, Sorceror is amazing) and Coppola (the young one) turning the industry upside down. Youtube creators fielding ultra low budget films that are creating more waves in the zeitgeist than $200 million slop petrifies the industry. Once they finally accept that California is no longer Hollywoodland nestled comfortably in the hills when in fact it is a cesspool of starfucker sycophants in luxury sedans driving past a small army of junkies and illegal immigrants on their way to work in a hermetically and spiritually sealed off studio lot.
So incredibly cut off from the culture at large that they will throw a billion dollars at this movie to try and reorient the universe as they see fit when they and everyone else knows deep down that there is a new order emerging and they are the scum fucks that will be high on the list of "culture warrior" types that will be among the first lined up against the wall when shit goes sideways.
The Odyssey is one of the most baffling and incompetent big summer blockbusters I've ever seen in the cinema. If they don't want to wade into the culture war arguments like Ellen Page's casting such as how the child actor in flashback playing her character is manlier than her supposed adult actor, fine. Or having the most Indian looking actor on film declare himself a Greek while pillaging a village, then fine. But there are clear cut technical failings with no political leanings whatsoever that they could've dug into. Particularly in the beginning, the editing is breakneck and not in a good way. No scene or character can breathe and Nolan seems determined to get the setup done as fast as possible. It's not the level of incompetence that you'll see on BOTW but it was a self imposed limit that Nolan set on himself for no good reason. For those of you who don't know, mega autist Nolan insisted on filming the Odyssey on IMAX film.
Why does that matter? Cause IMAX film has a hard 3 hour limit.
And you really FEEL how much Nolan has to squeeze into the movie. And here's the kicker: Nolan has known this since Oppenheimer so I don't know why he insisted on this. Despite its budget, the movie doesn't FEEL like it's costing over 250 million dollars so why bother using these expensive cameras?
They could've argued about this for a couple minutes. The so called film youtubers should be explaining this shit, not some retard on KF.
After watching RLM criticize new Star Trek for some time, which has been getting worse and worse, I got the impression that they actually do have some standards.
That's because it's Star Trek which Rich and Mike grew up on, did you already forget about how they initially swept all criticisms about The Acoshite as Wookieepedia addicts being mad that it wasn't exact to some autist lore and that you shouldn't be upset because there are starving Africans out there?
I started watching RLM when the first Plinket SW video came out and I've been with them since.
I don't know why this review is the one, but I'm done with them. They've been a shadow of themselves for years and their teeth have long been blunted. It's perfectly fine to like this movie, I suppose, but this seemed more like an editorial masquerading as a review. God bless them, I hope all of the Hollywood dick sucking eventually gets them a bag, but I'm checking out on them.
I started watching RLM when the first Plinket SW video came out and I've been with them since.
I don't know why this review is the one, but I'm done with them. They've been a shadow of themselves for years and their teeth have long been blunted. It's perfectly fine to like this movie, I suppose, but this seemed more like an editorial masquerading as a review. God bless them, I hope all of the Hollywood dick sucking eventually gets them a bag, but I'm checking out on them.
We all know that they read all the YouTube comments and lurk here. Hopefully this is a reckoning for them. They are in a class of their own among ranking film commentators (like Patrick Willems) that seem to genuinely want to keep that love for film alive but they really stepped in their dicks with this one, for whatever reason. I'll still watch, the BotW are usually gold.
"TikTok crowds could be here," he thought, "I've never been in this theater before. There could be TikTok crowds anywhere."
Well, yeah. A lot of times if uh I'll just get up and I'll just like walk around the lobby and smoke a cigarette and you know go on my phone and you know come back in 25 minutes later
This argument is absolutely absurd because apocalypto came out in 2006, made 120 million off a 40 million budget, was a hit in mexico, received constant praise from hollywood, and was filmed in a language literally nobody outside a minority in mexico knows. You think the guys who constantly bitch about hollywood lameness would be in favor of a little bit more ambitious film making to challenge audiences. "But subtitles and people on dey phones!" Most young people today watch anime and k-dramas, subtitles aren't a deal breaker anymore.
Yeah, I’m not understanding critics like them who keep admitting ways the movie isn’t ambitious. It doesn’t respect its source material or the culture it comes from, it’s riddled with muddy lighting and color palette because that’s what smart dumbs think the ancient world was, it was afraid to utilize the language it was born in.
So if it’s ok to offer up the bare minimum, paint-by-the-numbers slop because the normies wouldn’t get it otherwise, why do critics hate Marvel/DC movies? This is just capeshit for history nerds.
This is why I stopped watching Half in the Bag, I can still derive some faint amusement from BoTW videos, but in their last many several lots of HitB's they come off as joyless, geriatric duds who need to be dragged off-stage via "vaudeville hooks" while a booing stage audience throws vegetables at them.
What the fuck are you talking about? You can run different decks, and just have an intermission which allows the projectionist to thread the new deck.
The negative can also be on IMAX and you can do whatever you want once its scanned to a digital projector. Then you can run a nice modern laser projector and it will be great.
Film is one of those mediums where no one cares how the sausage gets made but everyone wants to have an opinion.
Yeah, I’m not understanding critics like them who keep admitting ways the movie isn’t ambitious. It doesn’t respect its source material or the culture it comes from, it’s riddled with muddy lighting and color palette because that’s what smart dumbs think the ancient world was, it was afraid to utilize the language it was born in.
So if it’s ok to offer up the bare minimum, paint-by-the-numbers slop because the normies wouldn’t get it otherwise, why do critics hate Marvel/DC movies? This is just capeshit for history nerds.
Yes, and it's somehow worse, because history nerds would be very far up their asses about getting everything wrong, so it's capeshit for The History Nerd Crew™.
Whenever I hear that complaint, I assume that they're slow readers. Also, it's a Nolan film where everyone talks in low gravely voices so they sound super serious and none of it is ADR, so I need subtitles anyways. Which I can't turn on in the theater.
They just don't give a shit anymore. I realized that when they proudly pointed out that they walked out of the Minecraft movie about halfway through and still put out a review for it.
Even if they do watch the whole movie, Mike doesn't even bother sitting through it all himself and takes long breaks during the screening. As @I'm a Silly pointed out above, he admitted he does that in this very review.
I'm kind of reminded of that guy who made his own knock-off/Temu Plinkett reviews of the Star Wars sequels because he was so disappointed in how dulled the official Plinkett reviews were.
Everyone was clowning on him at the time, but in retrospect I think he had a point.
What the fuck are you talking about? You can run different decks, and just have an intermission which allows the projectionist to thread the new deck.
The negative can also be on IMAX and you can do whatever you want once its scanned to a digital projector. Then you can run a nice modern laser projector and it will be great.
Film is one of those mediums where no one cares how the sausage gets made but everyone wants to have an opinion.
Nolan literally explained that the current platter system used on IMAX film projectors have a hard physical limit of what it can hold. Yes, I know that you can just run through a digital projector, but Nolan didn't make the movie with that in mind. The "solution" of having wagies thread the second film reel in a reasonable amount of time, do that well, and on a constant basis during multiple showings every day is ridiculous.
The "solution" of having wagies thread the second film reel in a reasonable amount of time, do that well, and on a constant basis during multiple showings every day is ridiculous.
