WONDER WOMAN 2 directed by Patty Jenkins (11/1/19) 3 3

[kav]

8 hours ago, Angel of Death said:

That could be consistent within the movie, hence why consistency is immaterial to suspension of disbelief.

But if it wasnt-if it was a medical thriller and it was done by people who knew nothing about medicine and used a spatula for surgery and an IV of maple syrup to 'raise the glucose level" then it would be inconsistent with reality and no one would suspend their disbelief for that (I hope).

[theCapraAegagrus]

Just now, kav said:

But if it wasnt-if it was a medical thriller and it was done by people who knew nothing about medicine and used a spatula for surgery and an IV of maple syrup to 'raise the glucose level" then it would be inconsistent with reality and no one would suspend their disbelief for that (I hope).

If it's based on "reality", then there is no need to suspend disbelief. It just wouldn't make sense.

[kav]

You realize you are arguing that all movies are good, right?  Because you say the audience should never withhold suspension of disbelief.

[kav]

Just now, Angel of Death said:

If it's based on "reality", then there is no need to suspend disbelief. It just wouldn't make sense.

sure you need to suspend disbelief in movies based on reality-when they dig out the bullet, kill people wih an air bubble injection, leave a breakfast table full of food and grab a piece of toast and say "I'm in a hurry", hack a system without googling anything and in 30 seconds say "I'm in!", the list goes on and on.

[theCapraAegagrus]

2 minutes ago, kav said:

sure you need to suspend disbelief in movies based on reality-when they dig out the bullet, kill people wih an air bubble injection, leave a breakfast table full of food and grab a piece of toast and say "I'm in a hurry", hack a system without googling anything and in 30 seconds say "I'm in!", the list goes on and on.

These things aren't impossible.

[kav]

10 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

These things aren't impossible.

An air bubble injection killing someone is impossible.  Doctors digging out bullets that are not in a joint space or impinging a nerveor vessel while not impossible would be malpractice.  Hacking a system in 30 seconds is impossible.

[theCapraAegagrus]

Just now, kav said:

An air bubble injection killing someone is impossible.  Doctors digging out bullets that are not in a joint space or impinging a nerveor vessel while not impossible would be malpractice.  Hacking a system in 30 seconds is impossible.

I can tell you from experience that this is not impossible. It depends on the "system".

[kav]

Just now, Angel of Death said:

I can tell you from experience that this is not impossible. It depends on the "system".

lets say the hacking one is possible.  the air bubble still stands.  If you need me to come up with more to make my point, I can.

[theCapraAegagrus]

1 minute ago, kav said:

lets say the hacking one is possible.  the air bubble still stands.  If you need me to come up with more to make my point, I can.

Your "point" is still conflating suspension of disbelief with consistency, though. They're not mutually exclusive. At this point, it seems that you just want to discuss semantics. There's nothing wrong with that, but I don't want to participate, if that's the case.

[kav]

4 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

Your "point" is still conflating suspension of disbelief with consistency, though. They're not mutually exclusive. At this point, it seems that you just want to discuss semantics. There's nothing wrong with that, but I don't want to participate, if that's the case.

Ok I guess we're done here but it's odd you are using semantics yourself in your fine tuning of the definition of 'suspension of disbelief'.

[Comicopolis]

"In contrast, writers Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely believe that only the removal of the Infinity Stones creates a new timeline, meaning that Steve Rogers was Peggy Carter's secret husband in the MCU all along. This certainly explains why an elderly Peggy had photos of Steve at her bedside, but none (apparently) of her actual husband."

This is how I see the time travel rules in Endgame.

But, I've just started watching the last season of Shield and time travel features in this, so I'll see how it goes.

[theCapraAegagrus]

15 hours ago, Comicopolis said:

"In contrast, writers Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely believe that only the removal of the Infinity Stones creates a new timeline, meaning that Steve Rogers was Peggy Carter's secret husband in the MCU all along. This certainly explains why an elderly Peggy had photos of Steve at her bedside, but none (apparently) of her actual husband."

This is how I see the time travel rules in Endgame.

But, I've just started watching the last season of Shield and time travel features in this, so I'll see how it goes.

This doesn't make any sense, according to the scene between Steve and Peggy in The Winter Soldier.

Their explanation also doesn't make sense if we're to believe Professor Hulk's exposition to Rhodes and Lang. "Changing the past doesn't change the future." That means that time would have to play out while Steve was frozen before he could go back in time while he was frozen.

Now, time travel doesn't make sense to begin with, but the idea that there were 2 Steve Rogers on Earth at the same time (for a lifetime) makes literally no sense. Peggy can't simultaneously live a life without Steve while also with him. Gnome-a-Saiyan?

[paperheart]

.59574468085 - one negative review away from Rotten    bring out the wish stone

Edited January 8, 2021 by paperheart

[Bosco685]

2 minutes ago, paperheart said:

.59574468085 - one negative review away from Rotten    bring out the wish stone

What did you think of the film? Any positives or was it all negative for you?

Just wondering. 

[Bosco685]

Looks like how WM is working around WB international streaming contract hurdles is going direct with releases.

 

[paperheart]

won't get to $27MM in China, >70% lower than WW

[Chaos_in_Canada]

[drotto]

3 hours ago, Chaos_in_Canada said:

WW 84 just illustrates it, but studios have figured out how to manipulate the critic system.  Invite friendly critics to early screenings and allow them to release their positive reviews first.  This falsely inflates the tomatometer, so they can get that fresh rating for the ads. Run the add while that claim is true  Then when it gets eventually pulled, it is too late because the ads are out there.

[paperheart]

14 minutes ago, drotto said:

WW 84 just illustrates it, but studios have figured out how to manipulate the critic system.  Invite friendly critics to early screenings and allow them to release their positive reviews first.  This falsely inflates the tomatometer, so they can get that fresh rating for the ads. Run the add while that claim is true  Then when it gets eventually pulled, it is too late because the ads are out there.

are you saying that it's not just a statistical anomaly that the first 62 reviews had an 89% RT and the following 315 reviews had a 54% RT?

[drotto]

10 minutes ago, paperheart said:

are you saying that it's not just a statistical anomaly that the first 62 reviews had an 89% RT and the following 315 reviews had a 54% RT?

Yes, yes I am.