Recent films
Ad Astra
I’d rather re-watch 2001…
So much attention to detail, but fails on the larger points. It took me a while to understand what the story was even about.
I’d rather re-watch 2001…
So much attention to detail, but fails on the larger points. It took me a while to understand what the story was even about.
Solid, but forgettable.
First Tarantino movie that made me realize he's actually still a child. Not because of violence fantasies or lazy non-/racism or whathaveyou, but because he can't let anything in his movies have an emotional impact. Even when a character dies, he just makes you go “huh”, shrug, and carry on.
Even lazier than vice news. I understand the circumstances of the creation might've been difficult, but what an insult. As Jackie Chan says: “Will you go into every theater and tell the audience how hard the shoot was?”
Kinda mesmerizing, mood-based rather than story-driven. Ryan Gosling is so bland, but somehow his movies always end up being very enjoyable, and his "character" somehow remains interesting.
Who would have thought the German film industry could produce a proper thriller? Quite nicely done. A bit outmoded in terms of plot - “Agent uncovers shady weapons deals with evil country, weapons industry and politics/spooks are conspiring, he wants to get the truth out” - but the pacing is good and the actors are performing well (for German standards).
It's got some good shots. The action and combat sequences were great, but the aftermath of the café bombing had the best one: An aerial shot of the city with a plethora of blue lights blinking in the near distance, an understated way to emphasize the state of emergency. The lakeside location was a good touch, and you immediately know it was in Bavaria because the onion-domed tower managed to squeeze into the shots. Another nice one: Behrens paying Lemke a visit in his flat. Lemke just wants his cigarettes, unperturbed by the threat of physical violence, and seems so happy to find them stashed on the ledge. Only when both men have calmed down does the exposition start - that's good pacing.
Scenes of military operations, drone footage, the intersection of the civilian, politics and military, high-ranking civilians involved in military operations - seems we as a society collectively have a hard-on for these things since Sicario. But then again, I also always think “Sicario did it better” with regards to the atmosphere of dread portrayed.
What I didn't like: How the characters were just thrown at the viewer in the briefing scene. You didn't really know who was who, and to the end I still was not clear about Rauhweiler's, Vossmeier's, Schilling's or Grünhagen's position, I thought they were all some medium-ranking underlings in the section. Only after the thing (no spoilers) happens to Grünhagen and did I realize he was the president of the BND, and it seems Rauhweiler was a hotshot on some government committee on weapons oversight with real influence.
Also, German films have a tendency to use disheveled appearance and lacking personal hygiene as a shorthand for toughness, and it's not working at all. Give your protagonist a proper shave at least.
Having Global Logistics be the mysterious cabal steering everything was lazy (and having it be only German seemed even lazier), but the reveal of it being just a cog in the global security machine worked well. Sadly, the resolution and Lemke’s explanations were rushed.
But all in all, very enjoyable. And finally a mature ending! Instead of the family-friendly “evildoers brought to justice”, some proper, believable devil’s advocating and then - revenge instead of “the truth”. That's grown-up cinema. Well done.
Doesn't it still miss the major sticking point; Google Play Services? That's not a problem for Huawei in their native China, where Google barely have a presence, but every western market consists of Android users who already have access to Google Play Services, and already have phones loaded with applications that take advantage of it.
Not having access to Google Play Services has historically crippled anyone who's tried to launch an alternative OS that could otherwise run Android apps.
Blackberry BB10 could run Android apps. Despite being a recognised and trusted name, Blackberry got nowhere with it.
Amazon launched the Fire phone, which was based on AOSP, ran Android apps, and even had it's own preexisting app store loaded with Android apps. In the end, Amazon couldn't give those phones away.
Samsung have Tizen; the in-house OS from the world's largest Android OEM. It too runs Android apps. Tizen's mobile market share is below 1%.
It's the Google Play Services that matter; not just the Android branding or access to Android apps.
Without Google Play Services, every developer whose app relies on location services will have to redevelop their app for whatever alternative location service Huawei provide.
Without Google Play Services, every developer will need to redevelop their app for whatever payment process Huawei provide for buying apps and making IAP's.
Without Google Play Services, any developer whose app relies on SafetyNet validation (nearly every banking app, many DRM related media apps) will need to redevelop their application for whatever alternative Huawei provides. It took years for banks to get onboard with things like mobile payments with Android; will they be any quicker with Huawei?
Without Google, any apps that rely on Firebase (Google estimates there are over a million devs using Firebase), will need to be redeveloped to work with whatever alternative Huawei can provide.
Without Google Play Services, any apps that run as app bundles will need to be redeveloped to run on Huawei devices.
What's the incentive for app developers to do any of the above, when they already have their hands full supporting hundreds of devices and billions of users in an established market?
Furthermore, without Google Play Services, any Android user moving to a Huawei device will lose the ability to backup and restore to their new Huawei device, making Huawei phones uniquely hard to migrate to.
None of the Huawei devices running their own OS will be able to Cast, or access Google Assistant. And, regardless of what OS Huawei use, none of them can be sold in the US.
Not to mention, any existing Android users who move to Huawei's in-house OS will need to repurchase the Android apps they already own, and the executive order blocking Google from engaging with Huawei applies to other US companies too; so in addition to Google's apps being unavailable, Huawei's app store won't include any apps by Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, eBay, PayPal, Amex, etc.
Given the big names who have tried and failed without some of the disadvantages Huawei now face, and in light of the above challenges, how likely is Huawei to succeed here?
Commenter Jimk4003 on Huawai's plans to forge its own path without Google's Play Services
The "protagonist" of a story, the way the Greeks used the term anyway, was the guy who set events into motion. Thanos wants The Tesseract, The Other sends Loki [the "ally"] and The Chitauri to get the Tesseract, and it falls to Nick Fury to stop those guys from doing that. This, technically, makes Nick Fury the antagonist of The Avengers. To make this distinction seems picayune, but, in fact, this protagonist problem is why so many superhero movies suck — it is inherent in the genre that the protagonist of the narrative is the bad guy. The moment you have a main character whose job it is to run around stopping things from happening, you have a reactive protagonist, which means a weaker narrative. When you have a weaker narrative, you end up throwing all kinds of nonsense at the screen, hoping that no one will notice that you have a reactive protagonist.
This is, incidentally, why Batman barely even shows up in Christopher Nolan's Batman movies — he understood that the protagonist of his Batman movies had to be Bruce Wayne, not Batman, and that, for his narratives to succeed, the bad guys had to be reacting to the actions of Bruce Wayne, not Batman reacting to the actions of the bad guys.
Originally: toddalcott.com (Superhero stuff is complete bullshit, but Chris Nolan's films are interesting, so read this)
Charming, but tame. Essentially a children's film from a story point of view. It's odd that until quite recently they were making almost only those… maybe cinema used to be more of a "family experience" back then?
James Garner is incredibly charming. So much so that he makes you forget what a type that "Simple Newspaper Boy from Winnipeg" really was. That 80s infatuation with all things "business" really hasn't aged well either. Go watch Support your local Sheriff instead.
Broken dirty cop with a heart of gold. Nice execution, I liked the limited space idea. The twist toward the end is great. Be careful with the dub, since the movie hangs on the voice actors.
On its own, a great movie. If you're familiar with the Farhadi formula, you wish he did try something different sometimes. But still, riveting.
Homeland cinema: Better than I expected. Not very educational, kinda small-minded.
Masterpiece.
I have the feeling it could have been more cohesive without studio influence. Mediocre. If you're not plugged into current Yankee politics, it will be even less interesting.
Meh
make effort sexy again
(Quote source: jamie loftus)
…the irony of my as of late low-effort reposting of twitter quotes is not lost on me
It's incredible that one of the best things you can do in America, which is speed along Mulholland Drive late at night, is free
from Dan O'Sullivan
Blockchain tech is the intersecting black hole in the Venn diagram of everything wrong with the tech industry. Delusional anti-govt rhetoric, utter bullshit alternating with fraud, solutions in search of problems, environmental waste—a vast domain of vicious uselessness.
Itamar Turner-Trauring on the blockchain hype