Jump to content

Treble

Donor
  • Content count

    8,565
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

5,000 profile views
  1. Maybe it's because it's the R rated one? I'd never seen that cut before. Me and Mrs. Treb watched it last week, and we were surprised to see Margot Robbie in the nudd. Her in an academic way, me with a far more positive and excitable response.
  2. Treble

    GLOW

    They rounded the edges off for season two, but I actually think that was for the best. It's not just about the 80s, it's done in an 80s TV format and got some stuff we've been missing: lightness and fun, montages, short running length that leaves you wanting more rather than being annoyed at the bloat. All round, great entertainment
  3. Treble

    Recommended game lists

    @Pixel, yeah I keep meaning to then forget! Will do a few today
  4. Treble

    Rogue Trooper

    Um... or:
  5. I'm probably about 50 hours in, and each time I play my internal monologue is moaning about something - getting shot from off screen, opening a door onto a powerful enemy, weapon balance, OP bosses - but I can't stop coming back to it. I do think a rebalance is a bloody good idea, though. You could turn it from an addictive, fun game into a genuine classic.
  6. Treble

    Marvel's Black Widow solo movie

    Romanov brings a lot to the table, when given a chance. Rewatch Civil War.
  7. Treble

    Star Wars: The Last Jedi - December 2017

    @HarryBizzle, you can make a good argument that Rogue One is the most Star Warsy Disney SW film, as it manages to introduce new tech and design without spoiling the feel. Not even the prequels could do that.
  8. Treble

    Star Wars: The Last Jedi - December 2017

    I'm so fed up of Jedi (the order). These days, it ruins Star Wars for me. Why? For a few reasons, but mainly because it started off as a storytelling device to separate goodies from baddies - and was therefore poorly sketched and reliant on emotional impact - and now too much emphasis is being placed on it. The fans sated their lust for the 'Wars during the "dark days" (83-99) by playing video games and RPGs, now want everything codified. In 1983, the Emperor using electricity as a cruel, taunting punishment of Luke, instead of, I dunno, blasting him to atoms, morphing him into the hull of a Star Destroyer, casting him into the nearest star, was the action someone who (we assumed) could do pretty much anything by being tapped into the unholy and demonic darkness. By 2005, it had morphed into the likes of Dooku 'unlocking' FORCE LIGHTNING!(TM) as he's reached 'ambassador' class Sith or whatever the fuck. That's infinitely stupid, and - worse - really restrictive. Putting limits on what the force can do is a) bullshit demanded by fans, b) poor storytelling because... ...deep breath... ...the ships and weapons are quantifiable. The force should always be unquantifiable. The delicate balance between a broken-down universe of fascist dictators, bounty hunters, planet-killing weapons and fleets of laser-spitting pew-pew ships is the cool, calm, contemplative light side. Quantifying it panders to fandom and takes away the one thing that gives Star Wars its heart: a sense of moral and ethical balance that creates and binds a group of friends who love each other. I appreciate Johnson opening-up the idea of the force again, but for me I want it dialled right back to an undercurrent of mysticism after the Skywalker saga's done. I could go many years before seeing another lightsaber fight, too.
  9. Treble

    PlayStation VR

    A world of no. I can't manage Resi in VR, so this would for definite stop my heart. Bought Archangel in the sale. I know it's not meant to be great, but couldn't pass it up for £9.
  10. Treble

    Star Wars: The Last Jedi - December 2017

    Good points, the new ones being underwritten is debatable, for sure. I'd say that Holdo is pretty thinly sketched and you could describe her in broad terms - stern, confident, powerful - but I credit Dern with much of that rather than the writing. Rose is also not great. She starts well, with this edgy energy, but then is just reactive apart from the shoehorned bit about animal rights. But yeah, there's a strong argument that the new characters don't hinder the plot, I suppose. Edit: @Alex W.
  11. Treble

    Star Wars: The Last Jedi - December 2017

    I haven't read one. The main factor seems to be that there are so many changes to the established formula, but Johnson doesn't make a great film out of it. He makes a GOOD film out of it, but not great. If it was great - a classic blockbuster like Indy, Jaws, BTTF, Titanic, the original film - it'd be a more straightforward 'fan boys vs critics/the non-invested'. But frustratingly, it has too many flaws to confidently shrug off fanboy frothing: it has a lumpen second act; it has new characters that are underwritten; it has old characters that don't have enough screen time; it has a slow pace; the space/vehicle action scenes are pedestrian. On the other hand, it also has loads of stuff that works beautifully, especially some striking visuals, good hand to hand fight scenes and a wonderful interpretation of the force. Looper was solid but pretty insubstantial and not particularly satisfying. I think this is the hardest Johnson ever has and ever will work, but shows that even his 'best' is not brilliant. That mix of good ideas and lore shake-up has made the fans feel like it's a rebuke on one hand, and film fans knock it for its technical and artistic flaws on the other, doomed to never unite either audience fully. I'd say that if it wasn't a Star Wars film, it'd be thought of as alright but no big deal then, like Looper, forgotten outside of genre fan circles. Oh, apart from Joseph Gordon-Levitt's weird Bruce Willis facial prosthetics, which still haunt me
  12. Treble

    La La Land

    Not sure if anyone remembers this conversation, but I finally got around to a re-watch. Hmm, right. We;ll, the conversation has changed a LOT in 18 months. Moonlight (rightfully) beat this to the Oscar, yet even that win got marred by the morons reading out the wrong winner. Now the narrative is "Remember when Moonlight won and they read out La La Land by mistake?" rather than simply, "Remember when Moonlight - that film about gay black people - won Best Picture?". A smallish thing, but an annoying thing.We've had releases of Black Panther, Wonder Woman, Coco, etc. and have a better understanding of how our privilege can stop the right voices telling their stories. So, to Whiplash. The Shaffer school (a stand-in for the real world Julliard) is - I guess - unlikely to have a large proportion of black pupils, simply down to economic factors. There are a handful of black pupils in scenes, only one where two talk (in sotto voce) and no black protagonists. In itself and due to the nature of the story - one person, who happens to be white, is blind to all other factors in life due to career ambition - not a problem. Odd, but not a problem. J.K. Simmon's professor - Fletcher - insults all his pupils with gay jibes, calling them 'faggot' and talking about them 'sucking cock'. Not a problem in and of itself, but there's no subtle nod to the fact he's doing this; no character calling him out on it; no positive (or even neutral) portrayal of a gay character to compensate; no insinuation that Fletcher is a self-hating gay man a la Beau Travail. So we have to assume Damien Chazelle has these intentions. Odd, out of step with modern culture, but not (necessarily) a problem. Then, on to La La Land. Again, POC are not represented very much here. Singing City of Stars, Gosling hands a hat back to a black man who says 'thank you', but is muted and we don't hear him. We hear a couple of sentences from his backing band. Mia marries a white guy who is accorded several lines of dialogue. Seb's sister marries a black man, and you never hear him speak. John Legend gets a decent part, but he's famous outside of the film. There are no Latino/Latina parts that I can recall, despite LA being 50% Hispanic. So yeah, another film about two obsessed and self-obsessed people where the people in the background are pretty much just matte paintings. Odd, but not in and of itself a problem. So yes, my opinion has changed. Do I think the film is overtly racist? No. Do I think it disrespects the importance of the black voice in Jazz? Nope. What what's the problem? Well, it's not 100% necessary to have representation of different ethnicities in films, or of gender. If you don't give voice to other sections of society to tell your very specific story, that's not inherently bad. It does become an issue when every tale you tell is set in and around cultures that are not white, yet you ignore them. Not according any power or voice to the people whose faces make up a city and inform its entire lifestyle (Hispanic people in LA), not empowering the black voice in two (two!) films about Jazz music. For the record, I think LLL operates on two levels: superficially it's about how you have to choose whether to compromise love for art, or vice versa. The slim subtext is that 'artists are self-involved' as evidenced by the characters in Mia and Seb's liives being utterly peripheral. This subtext is thinly-sketched as not to interfere with the plot, which I think is the right choice - the film is very melancholic already; even the original songs are downers. It should be operating on a third level - acknowledging the world around it, and explaining why we don't have non-white characters in prominent roles, in a city 60% non-white, performing music created by black people and mostly still performed and advanced by black people. But no one single thing is a problem, it's the gestalt. It doesn't make LLL a bad film, nor a racist one, but it makes it tone deaf, unintentionally anachronistic* and superficial in a way that's not intended. Chazelle clearly thinks he's covered his bases by acknowledging these characters are selfish and privileged (both main characters whine endlessly about their lives, whilst being employed and living in nice houses) but in doing so is blind to the other pitfalls he's created. TL;DR: La La Land is an ok movie that has some well-crafted musical numbers, good (but not great) performances, and doesn't drag too much. It's not racist; it doesn't negate the roots of Jazz in black culture. It does, however, fluff having any deeper significance or cultural relevance due to a multitude of minor sins caused by Chazelle's refusal to incorporate any non-white, non-male, non-hetero perspectives. That's fine, but it remains a superficial and trivial film for those reasons. * Chazelle toys with anachronisms - the clothes, the art deco side of LA, the obsession with traditional Jazz, Rebel without a Cause - but only in a superficial, "Hollywood musicals eh?!" kind of way.
  13. Treble

    Star Wars: The Last Jedi - December 2017

    Y'know, writing that, TFA needed LOTS more Leia.
  14. Treble

    Star Wars: The Last Jedi - December 2017

    Paging @Darren ! IIRC, he said the basics were: remnant fled to the outer rim/uncharted space(?) where they aligned with Snoke (hiding? Exiled?) and consolidated. In the meantime, to avoid another Empire rising, the galaxy disarmed and became pacifists. Hence the Resistance forming, as Leia thought the galaxy was being a stupid-head. Or something .
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.