unfortunately that's what you gotta put up with if you want to hang out with dudes these days. also infodumps about seed oils.
There’s something inherently unpleasant about them playing poker on a pool table. You have both the space and the money for a pool table but you don’t have a regular table to sit at? Or you did but you’re choosing to play on the pool table? There’s no good explanation for something like this. Get a real table and stop living on the set of a manopshere YouTube channel.
I would guess it’s an AirBnB:
-Grey/white everything
-extremely light on decoration and what is there doesn’t match what I would expect thoseguys would like (a framed landscape painting, metal leaf statue)
-simultaneously clean but a mess due to beverage containers everywhere. The guys can’t have have occupied this space for more than 72 hours
Looking at it, I'd guess that it's an apartment complex clubhouse for most of the same reasons.
Also GET YOUR FUCKING DRINKS OFF OF THE FELT! This makes me feel like they aren't using it as a pool table, which is a shame cause pool is way more fun than poker. And I like playing poker
I think it's practical in a way. The pool table surface is similar to that of a poker table. I imagine it's also higher than a regular table which makes it easier to quickly check under your cards.
It’s practical until someone inevitably spills a beer and you have to clean it out of the felt.
It means you need to get the table resurfaced because no matter what, a ball is gonna roll a bit different over that stained area than it would otherwise
This is what I’m saying! You can’t just treat a pool table like your goddamn kitchen counter.
If I wasn't on a short term lease rn I'd have bought a pool table, this place is like all living room, I could fit it. Like, if you did that at a bar pool table they'd tell you to stop playing poker on it, but also make you remove your drinks, and even if you switched to playing pool, that's a two strike scenario before you're kicked off the table generally. Pool tables ain't cheap.
I now feel extremely bad for my karate sparring partner from middle school now. Or more specifically her dad, who's pool table probably had balls rolling differently on it after we sparred a few times.
We had an old pool table once because a friend was just giving it away. Almost never used it for pool, but it did get a lot of board game use.
I do not like this interiour design, feels super cold and noisy
Dang what wouldve happened if someone put on a good movie though?
It's good, not great. It's 45 minutes too long, ends with an irrelevant subplot that retreads the themes we've already covered, and has a bunch of needless cuts. The beginning of the film treats famous physicists like Marvel superhero reveals and is unintentionally very funny. The 30 minutes before and after they detonate the Trinity atom bomb are some of the most harrowing scenes I've seen in a long time, and capture how horrible the creation of this monster was. It's not a flattering portrait of Oppenheimer, and is resolutely anti-nuke by the end of the film. The fact that we don't even see a Japanese person once is uh certainly a choice but overall the politics aren't completely fucked, and the movie itself is well made (mostly).
Ugh it sounds like it's plagued with the same issues most other modern blockbusters are.
I liked it but the politics are lib and the Robert Downey jr. plot is boring and pointless. Would have been way more interesting if it had focused on where the uranium came from and what happened to the people who got nuked. Even the brief “nuclear horror” scene is nothing compared with a truly disturbing film like Threads.
I think the fundamental problem is that the movie is about Oppenheimer, not the bomb. The only scenes he isn't in are basically the RDJ ones, he's in every other one. I don't know if he ever visited Hiroshima or Nagasaki, but he definitely didn't right after the bombs were dropped. They definitely needed to show more of the evils he was complicit in, rather than just making him a tortured genius.
the movie would have been so much better if they actually showed the bombs being dropped. like you're sympathetic to the Oppenheimer character, you know why he's doing what he's doing, you almost feel bad for him - and then halfway through, cut to a Japanese family and see the absolute devastation and misery cause by nuclear weapons. then you go back to Oppenhimer, seeing him as the monster he is.
I don't think that would have made the movie better, it would have made it align better with your view on the events. Honestly I would enjoy a movie made under your views better, but for what the film was only showing him was best. This might sound stupid, but the problem with the film is ultimately the society which created it. They do show his arrogance, but because of how great man theory works in westoid culture, this is just a quirk or slight failing. We feel bad for him once he feels guilt, even though we should feel revulsion at his actions, due to the fact we always treat what he did as justified.
I also disagree with the moment of the bomb dropping as the key moment of horror. Far more people died from the US fire bombing campaign than either bomb, the destruction of families was neither peculiar to the atomic bomb nor really a result of oppenheimer's actions in particular. The frame to show is the fallout. Fire bombs leave charred remains, atomic bombs leave a crater. And the poison it spread into the people who survived, radiation poisoning and cancer and the horror of seeing your loved ones made into shadows, that's what the bomb leaves behind. And that's what oppenheimer didn't prevent. It's not just a bigger bomb he made, and that's what the story should emphasize. He didn't know what it would do to people, but he never checked.
I liked it but the politics are lib and the Robert Downey jr. plot is boring and pointless.
why did they spend half the movie on this bizarre courtroom intrigue thing that nobody cares about?
I enjoy all of Nolan movies but had to turn this one off about 40min in. I may give it another chance someday. The dialogue was unbearable. I think Nolans other movies being clearly supernatural nonsense fiction give them a pass in this regard. I felt embarrassed by the movie.
I'd like to know too. I mostly keep up with just horror and it's been a shit year for it. Saw Barbie and thought it was silly and fun. Might give Oppenheimer a go if it's not too propaganda-y.
Only thing I might say is that it focuses on the person only when grappling with the consequences of the bomb. That's the point of the film though, but it might seem tasteless given that many more lives were affected to a far greater extent than Oppenheimer's name itself
Haven't heard a whole lot from anybody getting to upset about the politics of it, most consistent comment I've heard of it is its too much too fast. Lots of fast cuts and three minute scenes that jump around without a whole lot of cohesion.
That room is lit like a supermarket and it has about as much charm and personality.
Everything about this picture looks profoundly unpleasant, the harsh lighting, the dudebros engaging in poker, the most basic unimaginative dudebro activity, having a pool table in your living room, having a red pool table, putting beverages on the pool table because apparently you want to destroy it, putting up bathroom tiles in the living room, the depressing grey furniture, the sad and pointless picture on the wall, the TV so close to the ceiling. This is the living space of a man whose personality consists of sports, beer, the one transphobic joke, mild sexism and nothing else.
I am so thoroughly content skipping a movie about a great man of history and his quest to turn minorities into ash
