The Glade 4.0 :: View topic

Saw it Friday morning. Was going to post about it, but realized I don't have a whole lot to say. The story wasn't bad, but the entire premise was based on something I couldn't help but nit-pick to death.

What it came down to for me was ...

Spoiler:

Austin: Wait a tick. Basil, if I travel back to 1969 and I was frozen in 1967, presumeably, I could go back and visit my frozen self. But, if I'm still frozen in 1967, how could I have been unthawed in the '90s and traveled back to...
[goes cross-eyed]
Austin: Oh, no, I've gone cross-eyed.
Basil: I suggest you don't worry about those things and just enjoy yourself.
[to camera]
Basil: That goes for you all, too.
Austin: Yes.

FAR easier to watch than, say, Primer :psyduck:

Shelgeyr wrote:

FAR easier to watch than, say, Primer :psyduck:

I loved that movie.

Huh, Primer looks interesting (well, after I spent five minutes trying to figure out what it's about; the IMDB summary is completely useless). It's on Netflix, I'll check it out.

Author:	Aethien [ Sun Oct 14, 2012 1:17 am ]
Post subject:	So, no Looper?
Huh, kind of odd that no one has mentioned seeing Looper yet. Surely I can't be the first one here to see it, right? I mean, it's been out for two weeks. Anyway, it's fun, lots of stuff to spoil, though. Bruce Willis gets to be a bit badass, Emily Blunt is hot, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt does a great job. My wife and I are still discussing the whole time-travel thing, too. I feel like Captain Janeway sometimes. A very interesting view of the future, worth seeing.

Author:	Jasmy [ Sun Oct 14, 2012 2:02 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, no Looper?
Haven't heard of it, but it sounds interesting. Thanks for the heads up!

Author:	Slythe [ Sun Oct 14, 2012 3:13 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, no Looper?
Saw it last night actually. Very good movie; has a 93% on Rotten Tomatoes at the moment.

Author:	Shelgeyr [ Sun Oct 14, 2012 5:36 am ]
Post subject:
Saw it Friday morning. Was going to post about it, but realized I don't have a whole lot to say. The story wasn't bad, but the entire premise was based on something I couldn't help but nit-pick to death. What it came down to for me was ... Spoiler: If you've got access to time travel, there are better things you could be doing with it. Hell, even if you accept the idea that the best these "powerful criminal organizations" can come up with is a way to dispose of bodies, there are better ways to accomplish that task.

Author:	Numbuk [ Sun Oct 14, 2012 12:21 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: So, no Looper?
Shel, Cracked is with you on that one.

The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/

So, no Looper? https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9249	Page 1 of 1

Author:	Aethien [ Sun Oct 14, 2012 7:56 pm ]
Post subject:	Re:
Shelgeyr wrote: Saw it Friday morning. Was going to post about it, but realized I don't have a whole lot to say. The story wasn't bad, but the entire premise was based on something I couldn't help but nit-pick to death. What it came down to for me was ... Spoiler: If you've got access to time travel, there are better things you could be doing with it. Hell, even if you accept the idea that the best these "powerful criminal organizations" can come up with is a way to dispose of bodies, there are better ways to accomplish that task. Spoiler: Well, yeah, but maybe it's something a la Timecop, where the authorities would pick up on anything that would actively change the future. Abe even says that it gets messy, etc., if a guy doesn't close his loop. Or, maybe something they would do would screw up the future so that they're no longer able to do what they do, etc. I was willing to accept the premise, I guess. Edit: Guess I should spoiler that.

Author:	Arathain Kelvar [ Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:31 am ]
Post subject:
Quote: Austin: Wait a tick. Basil, if I travel back to 1969 and I was frozen in 1967, presumeably, I could go back and visit my frozen self. But, if I'm still frozen in 1967, how could I have been unthawed in the '90s and traveled back to... [goes cross-eyed] Austin: Oh, no, I've gone cross-eyed. Basil: I suggest you don't worry about those things and just enjoy yourself. [to camera] Basil: That goes for you all, too. Austin: Yes. Sometimes there's things you just need to accept as a background assumption, and just go from there. As long as it's a background item, and this crap isn't coming up all through the movie, I can generally stand it. ("There are aliens that are about to invade planet earth" - ok, carryon. versus "Oh yeah, and they wear no clothes and carry no gear, despite being space travelers. And they can easily be locked in a pantry. Oh, and can be thwarted by hiding in the basement and nailing up the windows. And can be defeated by a glass of water, one of the most plentiful substances on the planet, that is present in massive quantities in the air we breathe, and settles out of the air when it gets cold, or worse - rains.)

Author:	Aethien [ Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:48 pm ]
Post subject:
Yeah, that's why I said I was willing to accept the premise. Also, my wife had a thought that perhaps they couldn't go back any farther than they remembered - or, maybe only as far back as the creator of the time machine remembered. Oh, but the thing that really got me? The notion that Topeka or Wichita is now this shining megalopolis or urban center of some sort.

Author:	Numbuk [ Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:55 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: So, no Looper?
Finally saw this. I enjoyed it. I thought JGL did an outstanding job impersonating Bruce Willis. The prosthetics helped, but his voice and especially his mannerisms really sold it. I'd see JGL make a specific, subtle reaction and I'd think "I've seen Bruce do that in a different movie." The movie did slow down to a crawl during the second half, but I think due to the story it's unavoidable. But it did make the movie feel long. To put it in perspective, my wife said "That movie felt longer than Cloud Atlas." And Cloud Atlas runs 1 hour longer than Looper. Still, it's one of the better Sci-Fi movies I've seen in recent years, along with some good performances (even the 4 year-old gives a great one).

Author:	Nitefox [ Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:36 am ]
Post subject:
Late to the party. LK and I rented it this weekend. I was very impressed. I didn't think it was going to be that dramatic. Very well done movie. JGL is becoming one of my favorite actors.

Author:	FarSky [ Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:05 am ]
Post subject:
'Twas fantastic.

Author:	Numbuk [ Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:44 am ]
Post subject:	Re: So, no Looper?
I have a hard time finding people I know (in person) that are either interested in this movie, or who enjoyed it. I don't quite understand. Easily one of the better sci-fi movies made in a long while.

Author:	Aethien [ Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:59 pm ]
Post subject:
Yeah, it's kind of funny how much non-love it got. Maybe a bit too cerebral?

Author:	Talya [ Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:01 am ]
Post subject:
I haven't watched it yet.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Shelgeyr [ Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:06 am ]
Post subject:
*FAR* easier to watch than, say, Primer

Author:	Slythe [ Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:24 am ]
Post subject:	Re:
Shelgeyr wrote: *FAR* easier to watch than, say, Primer I loved that movie.

Author:	Aethien [ Wed Jan 23, 2013 12:44 pm ]
Post subject:
Huh, Primer looks interesting (well, after I spent five minutes trying to figure out what it's about; the IMDB summary is completely useless). It's on Netflix, I'll check it out.

Author:	Shelgeyr [ Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:	Re:
Slythe wrote: Shelgeyr wrote: *FAR* easier to watch than, say, Primer I loved that movie. So did I. I'm not saying it was a bad movie, I'm just saying it wasn't easy to follow. Aethien wrote: Huh, Primer looks interesting (well, after I spent five minutes trying to figure out what it's about; the IMDB summary is completely useless). It's on Netflix, I'll check it out. Don't feel bad, it's really not easy to explain - and damn near impossible to explain without spoiling anything. Here, take a gander at Randall's interpretation (click the image for the full-sized version).