• PatFusty@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    7 months ago

    I would watch Barbie 500x before I watch Oppenheimer again. That movie was made for people with 10 second attention spans and that cinematographer should be arrested. Im surprised people didnt get epilepsy watching Oppenheimer.

    • VinnieFarsheds@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Skill issue. Just reading the Wikipedia article on the Manhattan Project would have given you most of the knowledge you need. I watched Oppenheimer and Barbie and liked both for different reasons.

    • Something_Complex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      51
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Wow, one has one of the most important and impressive complex storyline ever.

      The other one slightly defies gender roles and they rush the end…

      Shit I liked them both, but if you don’t like Oppenheimer it might be BC your IQ sits under the requirements man.

      Edit: I’m sorry for you guys :(, the world must be so simple too you I kinda admire it

      • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Like most Nolan films, it is pseudo-intellectual tripe that allows people to think they’re smart because they can follow the plot of a simple Hollywood blockbuster produced for the lowest common denominator. Its cinematography is like they’re making a tiktok to hold your atrophied attention span.

        The fact that you refer to the plot as ‘the most important and impressive complex storyline ever’ portrays your age, how little film you watch, and probably why we shouldn’t believe your take on either Barbie, Oppenheimer, or anything else.

        • Something_Complex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          7 months ago

          Hey you are absolutely right, if we die because of climate change instead of nuclear war.

          But I bet if the last thing you see is a bright flash it sudently becomes a lot more important

          • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            No, because Oppenheimer was not an instructional video on nuclear drills. Not that there are any; if nukes successfully hit, it’s the lottery if you survive healthy enough to continue humanity. I’m not sure how Oppenheimer is meant to change that fact. Good job reading my comment with zero comprehension I guess.

      • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        “To be fair, you need a pretty high IQ to watch rick and morty”

        If you think opp was intellectual you’re the self-important mediocre schlub it was meant to impress

      • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        An important and complex storyline can still be executed awfully either in writing or cinematography. But you gotta have at least a somewhat under the average IQ to understand that.

        • Something_Complex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          7 months ago

          Well I’ve whatched it’s really good. If you don’t understand people like west Anderson and directors in the same category I really wonder if you think this movie was bad

          • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            7 months ago

            It’s not about the movie(s) in question, it is a general statement. Saying a movie is automatically good because the underlying story is good or worth telling is denouncing so many factors that play into making a movie a good movie. PatFussy was only pointing out that the cutting was terrible (I haven’t seen the movie itself so I cannot judge it) and too fast paced. This is something that can absolutely ruin an otherwise great movie and make it unbearable to watch. The story, the script, the dialogue, the acting, the effects, the cutting, the lighting, the sound and soundtrack- all these things (and many more) are individually important and only when everything works well together a movie can be good (doesn’t automatically mean it is a good movie). Is Oppenheimer a story worth being told? Probably. Most stories are. Has it been told in a well executed way? I don’t know, and also this is a highly personal matter of taste. If someone thinks the cutting is epileptic then that’s a valid opinion that has nothing to do with their intelligence, not understanding a movie, or having an unsophisticated taste in cinema.

            As a side note, putting “West” Anderson in a category with Christopher Nolan is ridiculous. One makes arty, more indie movies with rather obscure storylines that rely heavily on the script and dialogue, while the other makes grand style blockbuster action movies. Except for both of them being famous and making movies, the difference could not be vaster.