IsRude

IsRude t1_j9z8v7c wrote

Their goal is to introduce into the target's head, the idea of dissolving his father's company. They have to be subtle, or else he'll know that the idea came from someone else, so they separate these 3 ideas into 3 separate dreams:

>First dream: "I don't want to follow in my father's footsteps."

>Second dream: "I want to create something for myself."

>Third dream: "My father doesn't want me to be him.

Each time they go deeper into a dream, the amount of time they'd be stuck in the dream if they fail is increased. Which is why they need to manually get themselves out of the dream, and why they need the music as a queue to help time everything correctly.

What they're timing is "kicks". They need to fall at the right time so they can wake up. If they fall in the first layer while they're all the way in the third layer, they'll be in too deep a sleep to wake up, and they'll just die and end up in limbo. So they have a series of kicks to wake them from the third dream layer, then the second, then the first, in succession.

I can explain more if that doesn't make sense. It's been a long while since I've seen the movie.

3

IsRude t1_j9xcb0g wrote

I had no trouble keeping up with Interstellar, Inception, and The Prestige, but they definitely benefit from repeat viewings because there are certain things that you pick up on new watches.

Tenet was absurd. If you have to sacrifice most of the emotion of your movie in favor of expository dialogue and your movie is still hard to follow AND even after "understanding" it, it's still ridiculous, maybe you've just made a bad movie. Even during the final emotional dialogue between Pattinson and Washington, there was so much poorly written exposition that the emotion turns to comedy. It felt like a satire of Christopher Nolan movies. I've seen it 3 times because I thought I was missing something, but it was just unfulfilling. It may be the only movie I've liked less upon a rewatch, other than movies shrouded by nostalgia.

5

IsRude t1_j27ait6 wrote

Oh man, I couldn't disagree more. I watched both with my family. We all thought Fatman was very well done. Between the dialogue, atmosphere, and writing, I thought it was a significantly better movie. Violent Night just made me cringe nonstop. I LOVE John Leguizamo, but thought this was the worst his acting has ever been. The writing and characters made me cringe throughout. The effects weren't good, the delivery of lines was stinted and forced. The kills were just not that interesting. Both tried to do something unique, but only Fatman did it well, I think. Despite Mel Gibson being a crazy asshole, Fatman felt like the better movie. I also loved Mrs. Klaus in Fatman. She was delightful.

−1

IsRude t1_j136lgl wrote

I finished Wednesday. It was okay, but I'm really surprised it was so popular. The acting wasn't good, the story wasn't great, Jenna Ortega was the best part, but even the writing for her character was so edgy I got tired of it pretty quickly.

The dance episode was the best, by far. >!Her smiling about the raining "blood" was adorable and disturbing in the perfect balance. And her dance was fucking phenomenal.!< But the rest of the series was mediocre, I thought.

I did like her roommate, and thought she was really charming, and the >!hug!< felt like it was hard-earned, but her acting wasn't great other than that scene. The boys in the love triangle, her parents, and most of the kids are disappointing.

17