Rules: explain why
Ready player one.
That has to be one of the cringiest movies I’ve seen, is tries so hard, too hard with it’s “WE LOVE YOU NERD, YOU’RE SO COOL FOR PLAYING GAMES AND GETTING THIS 80S REFERENCE” message and the whole “corporation bad, the people good” narrative seems written for toddlers… The fan service feels cheap and adds nothing to the story.
Finally, they trying to make the people believe that very attractive girl with a barely visible red tint spot on her face is “ugly”… Like wtf?
Yet it received decent reviews plus being one of the most successful movies of that year.
Hear hear. And the explosion was so fucking lame. Like why was the soot in the flames? We know what a plasma looks like. Heck, we even know exactly how that very bomb looked like when it exploded (cf. picture attached). It could have been an otherworldly experience akin to the well researched and well simulated black hole in Interstellar…
But no. We got gasoline. On fire. In an otherwise dizziness inducing and plain boring movie.
Edit. Looks like in struggling to attache a screen cap so I’ll leave it as an exercise to the reader to googelidoodeli “atomic bomb plasma”
Yeah, he supposedly wanted to make sure the bomb was a practical effect because he thought that would look better. Neglecting the simple fact that you cannot do a practical atomic bomb explosion for your movie, and that gasoline is not a nuclear bomb.
Don’t know how feasible, but I would have loved the idea of licensing the original footage and “restoring” it as best as possible with some tasteful CGI…
The original footage as in footage of the Trinity test?
I suspect it would already be public domain under US law, but would lack the coverage they’d need to do anything meaningful with it.
Yes. And fair point