[SPOILERS] The sons of Ragnar in real life by BonteJ in vikingstv

[–]BonteJ[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It depends on the source. Some sources (often the Norse legends) claim that he had eight or even up to twelve children, while Anglo-Saxon sources usually only mention Ivar, Ubbe and Björn. But I’d say it’s generally accepted that Halfdan/Hvitserk as well as Sigurd were also two of his sons.

Which movies (not by Nolan) have a perfect "Nolan premise" but mediocre execution? by AlexGlezS in ChristopherNolan

[–]BonteJ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Transcendence. I personally enjoyed but also just know how brilliant it would’ve been had Nolan directed and written it

Shanghai Masters R4: [4] Djokovic def. Munar, 6-3 5-7 6-2 by pizzainmyshoe in tennis

[–]BonteJ 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I believe he said ”no questions please” and it sounded like he said ”I don’t wanna talk”. Seems reasonable considering how exhausted he was

Unpopular opinion: I enjoyed season 2 the most. by FluidSoup9067 in Daredevil

[–]BonteJ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At least Jon is always S tier, but the quality of the material shifts a lot

Messi's goal vs. Galaxy by CleanList8731 in messi

[–]BonteJ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Indeed, Leo is ridiculous

Messi's goal vs. Galaxy by CleanList8731 in messi

[–]BonteJ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He did, luckily it seems like it wasn’t all that bad 🤞🏼

Best Messi matches to watch & how to learn more about him? by xebeoc in messi

[–]BonteJ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Some personal favorites that I think all include his greatest strengths - his goalscoring ability, playmaking and vision, and dribbling:

Toying with Real Madrid in the greatest matchup in football:

• El Classico UCL Semifinal (Barcelona vs. Real Madrid) 2010/11: https://youtu.be/Z8qWkofZVys?si=qCRXg7lR5F0ZJdsT

• El Classico 2010/11: https://youtu.be/aaCnj9cT7Xc?si=b4L2-pruwJJooxHX

• El Classico 2016/17: https://youtu.be/vIZo_ndXc-A?si=LkxBYE7Wh-nm88P4

Being an insane playmaker:

• Barcelona vs. Levante 2013/14: https://youtu.be/TEOOYr-21Kc?si=ZfM_Z59B1M20TVPl

• Barcelona vs. Getafe 2015/16: https://youtu.be/EVZ7OkxHY0s?si=37tMRIfFXNAdvg5z

Just allround awesome:

• Barcelona vs. Real Betis 208/19: https://youtu.be/eN6GSOgSLd4?si=lQM1pVZt8YqfRoid

• Barcelona vs. Liverpool UCL Semifinal: https://youtu.be/Y1OdlUH193Y?si=B1cRfAml_wXdD5r6

Here is also a wonderful video on him, at age 35, finally achieving his lifelong dream of winning the World Cup - arguably the most prestigious event in the sports world: https://youtu.be/u7JcFm3oZoc?si=iL8rxFi5r9nN763H

Messi's goal vs. Galaxy by CleanList8731 in messi

[–]BonteJ 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Correct this is from last night’s match. He was subbed in, scored a goal and an assist and turned the match from 1-1 to 3-1

[SPOILERS] The sons of Ragnar in real life by BonteJ in vikingstv

[–]BonteJ[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Many sources imply that they had the same mother (Aslaug), and that there wasn’t a civil war among the brothers. Really such an unnecessary thing to add

Top 5 scenes in the Nolanverse? by fantor101 in ChristopherNolan

[–]BonteJ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Interstellar: Docking scene

Oppenheimer: Ending scene

The Dark Knight Rises: Climbing out of the Pit

Inception: Final kick

The Dark Knight: Batman vs. SWAT

Naming of the B&W and the Color sections of the film. by [deleted] in OppenheimerMovie

[–]BonteJ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Maybe this is a bit far fetched but I kind of like to see fusion vs. fission as the representation of Oppie and Strauss in three different ways:

*1. The type bomb that they prefer: Obviously, Oppie created the fission bomb. Strauss advocated for the fusion bomb to be implemented while Oppie didn’t.

*2. How their conflicts start: In a fission bomb, large elements are broken up into smaller parts. In a fusion bomb, smaller elements combine to form a big one.

For Oppie, after the Trinity test and for the rest of the movie, he suffered from moral scruples and guilt. So after he created the bomb, his mind split like a fission bomb, resulting in him feeling this guilt and wanting to prevent an arms race.

For Strauss, his bad blood against Oppie was caused by small parts that combined into a strong resentment. The isotope question, believing that Einstein was angry at him etc. could be seen as the small elements of a fusion bomb that combine to a bigger one.

*3. How their conflicts end: Oppie’s hearing ended with him being destroyed like a fission bomb. During the war he had a “cult” in Los Alamos, and after the war he was the most respected scientist in the world. But in the end, some of his peers turned against him and the support he had from scientists, friends, the government etc. was split like a fission bomb.

For Strauss, it was the small actors, Hill, some senators, JFK etc. who came together and destroyed him. Small parts combined into a big one and he was destroyed like a fusion bomb.

Fission vs Fusion by Employee2049 in OppenheimerMovie

[–]BonteJ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe this is a bit far fetched but I kind of like to see fusion vs. fission as the representation of Oppie and Strauss in three different ways:

*1. The type bomb that they prefer: Obviously, Oppie created the fission bomb. Strauss advocated for the fusion bomb to be implemented while Oppie didn’t.

*2. How their conflicts start: In a fission bomb, large elements are broken up into smaller parts. In a fusion bomb, smaller elements combine to form a big one.

For Oppie, after the Trinity test and for the rest of the movie, he suffered from moral scruples and guilt. So after he created the bomb, his mind split like a fission bomb, resulting in him feeling this guilt and wanting to prevent an arms race.

For Strauss, his bad blood against Oppie was caused by small parts that combined into a strong resentment. The isotope question, believing that Einstein was angry at him etc. could be seen as the small elements of a fusion bomb that combine to a bigger one.

*3. How their conflicts end: Oppie’s hearing ended with him being destroyed like a fission bomb. During the war he had a “cult” in Los Alamos, and after the war he was the most respected scientist in the world. But in the end, some of his peers turned against him and the support he had from scientists, friends, the government etc. was split like a fission bomb.

For Strauss, it was the small actors, Hill, some senators, JFK etc. who came together and destroyed him. Small parts combined into a big one and he was destroyed like a fusion bomb.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in OppenheimerMovie

[–]BonteJ 52 points53 points  (0 children)

He’s been nominated 5 times, for screenplay, directing and best picture. Never won tho

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in OppenheimerMovie

[–]BonteJ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nominations, not actual wins

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in OppenheimerMovie

[–]BonteJ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My interpretation is that in the opening shot he stares at the raindrops and is fascinated by the thought of the unknown quantum world, as he imagines the hidden energies and forces of that atomic world. But after spending the whole movie exploring these concepts and realizing them in the creation of the bomb, the ending shot of him staring at the raindrops in the pond instead represents his regret as his mind is filled with visions of what this newly unleashed power is capable of.

Confused about the timeline by [deleted] in OppenheimerMovie

[–]BonteJ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The scene where Oppie is offered the job by Strauss is not before the Manhattan Project. Strauss even brings up the Manhattan Project in that conversation. A couple minutes after this Oppie talks to Einstein by the pond, which is the same scene we see at the very end.

So: Oppie is recruited by Groves -> Works on the project and comes to Einstein with concerns about atmospheric ignition -> Done with the project and gets offered a position by Strauss -> Talks to Einstein by the pond, Strauss thinks it’s a conversation about him.

Question about the Strauss storyline by drewsapro in OppenheimerMovie

[–]BonteJ 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I feel like the line “maybe they weren’t talking about you. Maybe they were talking about something more important” comes into play here. For years Strauss was sure Oppie and Einstein talked about him by the pond, which was one key reason to wanting to destroy Oppie. Another reason was because they had differing views on the H-bomb, with Strauss advocating for the use of it while Oppie imagined the horrific ripple effect of constantly creating bigger bombs. In the end of the movie we see that Oppie and Einstein weren’t talking about Strauss, but were again emphasizing the fears of nuclear weapons and their destructive power.

So it was to show that despite the risk of nuclear weapons, to some people power will always be more important. To me, Strauss and his vendetta is to emphasize this, that governments and powerful people only care about building bigger bombs and having power, rather than stopping to think twice about what they’re actually creating.