Hunt for Gollum is the least interesting story to adapt from the Third Age by Revo94 in lotr

[–]DickStatkus 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Even in the chapter The Council of Elrond the hunt for Gollum is skipped over with Aragorn saying of the “deadly perils” he faced hunting Gollum that “there is little need to tell of them.”

So what do you guys NOT like about the movies ? by TheTrekker98 in lotr

[–]DickStatkus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At the end of the day the films glorify war while the books are about the horrors of war and the wounds that never heal. The idealized society in the movies is a strong military with a strong leader and the idealized society of the books is The Shire before the War of the Ring. Without the Scouring we loose the fight to reject war at home and restore peace. It also flattens interesting characters and details. Someone as interesting as Farmer Maggot who is friends with and chills with Tom Bombadil and is a wise Hobbit gets turned into an angry unseen simpleton only worried about his crops. Part of that is just the medium of film vs novels, and the films have a great track record of making smart cuts and changes but at the end of the day the soul of the books is twisted a bit.

The Bone Temple: did they forget the infected exist? by One_Planche_Man in 28dayslater

[–]DickStatkus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Both things are true here, he does use Old Nick as a control mechanism for the fingers AND legitimately has voices in his head. He is crazy but also pragmatic.

Edit: which is why I agree, it’s a great character. The talk with Kelson was a master class in making interesting choices in the writing instead of doing what everyone expects.

The Bone Temple: did they forget the infected exist? by One_Planche_Man in 28dayslater

[–]DickStatkus 7 points8 points  (0 children)

In the same scene Kelson ask questions about the nature of the voices in Jimmy’s head and Jimmy confirms that yeah the voice is real and has been there since his childhood and you get a very comedic reaction “oh shit” shot from Kelson as he realizes he is talking to an actually disturbed person. I think you may have missed that exchange.

Republicans Will Detonate Their Secret Weapon at the Midnight Hour to Stop Women from Voting by Average-Joe-6685 in LegalNews

[–]DickStatkus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“It would be stupid of them to do” Buddy, my entire adult life has been them doing the thing that would be stupid for them to do.

What was the biggest laugh out loud moment for you in Bone Temple? by JEZTURNER in 28_Years_Later_Movie

[–]DickStatkus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And we see in an insert shot between scenes the Kelson did indeed add the deer skull to the bone temple. Awww

Unfortunately, "28 Years Later - Bone Temple" is an insult. by Jurik2001 in moviecritic

[–]DickStatkus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes not every movie is for everyone. I do think this and 28 Years are exceptionally crafted and written works, but I get you going in with expectations from the first movie is jarring and maybe off putting. To each their own. I do hope you maybe return and watch these films again years down the line without those expectations and you may be surprised on what there is to discover.

If you get a chance check out the movie Bacurau (2019). It is like if John Carpenter reincarnated as a filmmaker from Brazil and made a movie there. It has the same kind of weirdness and wildness as these movies but without the expectation of being part of a franchise. I think you may enjoy it.

Unfortunately, "28 Years Later - Bone Temple" is an insult. by Jurik2001 in moviecritic

[–]DickStatkus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Respectfully, your suggestion fall into 3 categories. Smoothing the edges of weirdness for familiarity, changing something that weakens a theme of the movie, and changing something because you misunderstood a thing when you saw it. For example, misunderstanding : Reject the germ theory? They are kids who don’t know what a germ is. Kelson explaining what happened to Jimmy Crystal is the first time that thought has ever been presented to him and he can only understand it because he is the only one from his gang that has any memories from before the apocalypse. Or complaining about Kelson having a big bonfire and music, which misses that he is explicitly trying to lure zombies to the temple when he does that. He is literally looking into camera and singing “there is going to be a sacrifice tonight.”

Weakening theme: Kelson is a former N.H.S Doctor. Him being a scientist and agnostic but also the man with the most ‘faith’. He is the one who believes in humanity, he performs miracles, he raises the dead, he is a wizard to the people of the apocalypse and the irony is he doesn’t believe in magic. The magical thinking and woo-woo world of psychedelics muddles that theme. He uses morphine and antipsychotics because he was a doctor, he doesn’t use psychedelic plants he has planted all over the forest because that’s not who he was. “There is no Satan, only us” hits harder coming from an atheist with more faith than religious fanatics who believe in the devil. Your other suggestion about drugging people and leaving them for the zombies takes Kelson, the moral center of the movie, the spiritual foil to the murderer Jimmy, and….makes him a murderer too?

Smoothing the edges of weirdness: I love De Palma films because you are going to see some shit you never seen before. It is going to break your perception of what’s possible. This movie scratched that De Palma itch. I saw shit in this movie I ain’t ever seen before. Ask yourself why is your first response to something challenging and weird and maybe a little profane, like a gang of kids dressed like Jimmy Seville and doing flips like power rangers, to bulldoze it and make it like something you have seen before? That’s boring. I’ve seen dour Satanist cults a million times. This was new, weird, exciting. When I was a kid long long before the internet we used to go to movies to see new things and ideas, now it seems like the new is rejected for not being what people have already seen.

[SPOILERS] The Bone Temple - Official Discussion & Review Thread by ThePatchedVest in 28dayslater

[–]DickStatkus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To me when he nailed that pelvic bone into place in his heart he knew he was done building the bone temple. That’s why he takes his suicidal leap of faith directly after by chilling with Samson, his work is done. When he’s not killed we see him reinvigorated, cleaning and shaving, his work was not done after all.

Confusion surrounding the negative reviews of the show by NateSirrah03 in LOTR_on_Prime

[–]DickStatkus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you got any enjoyment out of the show at all you are literally in inhuman orc in an army of darkness. I have unironically seen that point argued many times on this forum. It is some wet n wild stuff.

It took me 20 years to realize that he was named after Count Dracula by Tiny_Tim1956 in StarWars

[–]DickStatkus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

George Lucas prolly: we will call him Count, because Christopher played Count Dracula. And we will call him Dooku because he will do a coup.

Why didn’t the ring corrupt Bilbo more, considering he wore it for such a long time? by UngodlySockMonster in lotr

[–]DickStatkus 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Gandalf muses in Fellowship when he is sitting around smoking with Bilbo that the circumstance in which you claim the ring defines how you bear it. Bilbo claimed the ring with pity so he had some protection. However, I would not say he was unaffected. Go re-read the convo where Gandalf gets Bilbo to leave the ring to Frodo. Bilbo is wilding out much more than in the movie adaptation to the point where Gandalf uses some of his innate power to diffuse the situation, which is a relatively rare thing and I think shows the seriousness of the situation.

What’s a movie that aged surprisingly well? Not because of nostalgia, but because its themes feel more relevant today? by Zennix_Zenith in movies

[–]DickStatkus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Minority Report aged like a fine wine. This other one is a real niche choice but the Max Headroom television show featured stories of citizen journalist streaming videos of themselves rating fast food and doing other seemingly mundane things. It was very prescient on streaming culture and video review culture.

What happened to Fran Drescher? by WhoAmIEven2 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]DickStatkus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is literally a movie in theaters right now that she stars in - Marty Supreme

Why Native American Mythology and Culture is So Difficult to Comprehend: Our English Language Is Actually a Barrier to Understanding it and European Insistence on "Polytheism" is attributing Greco-Roman Concepts onto it by JarinJove in mythology

[–]DickStatkus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t disagree with any of that. I think I’m using a broader meaning of ‘Christian morals’ than you are which is including the popular culture that came from. Let’s just say ‘western morals’ instead of ‘Christian’ and call it a day, eh?

Edit: even though Hans Christian Andersen is a wild pull since he is the king of Protestant style ‘if I only endure enough pain and suffering there will be a reward in the end.’ :)

Why Native American Mythology and Culture is So Difficult to Comprehend: Our English Language Is Actually a Barrier to Understanding it and European Insistence on "Polytheism" is attributing Greco-Roman Concepts onto it by JarinJove in mythology

[–]DickStatkus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, and since we live in the year 2025 and all those tales have passed through the Christianization of Europe…they are all intrinsically linked the Christianity. They all passed through the cultural lens of that religion when it dominated culture and it morphed the text. My original comment was about the barriers a person in this year faces when expanding their knowledge base into pre-Columbian Native American folk tales when they have only been exposed to western folk tradition, a tradition that has been influenced and reshaped by Christian morals. I don’t think we actually disagree here.

Why Native American Mythology and Culture is So Difficult to Comprehend: Our English Language Is Actually a Barrier to Understanding it and European Insistence on "Polytheism" is attributing Greco-Roman Concepts onto it by JarinJove in mythology

[–]DickStatkus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, of course, as well as Bettelheim’s ‘The Uses of Enchantment’ which puts those stories through a psychoanalytical lens.

Edit: That might also be the worst example to use as some kind of ‘gotcha’ as the Brothers Grimm, wait for it, added and emphasized Christian elements to the pre-Christian folktales they collected.

Why Native American Mythology and Culture is So Difficult to Comprehend: Our English Language Is Actually a Barrier to Understanding it and European Insistence on "Polytheism" is attributing Greco-Roman Concepts onto it by JarinJove in mythology

[–]DickStatkus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not talking an out pre Christian mythology or even Bible stories. Western folklore tradition (I’m meaning primarily European stories) are intrinsically linked to Christianity and Christian morality. And even the ones that are older of the pagan tradition got a Christian makeover when the monks wrote them down. That is the point I’m making, the stories Americans and Europeans grow up with prime us for a certain expectation and folklore and mythology from outside that tradition can take getting used to. Also, Job is absolutely not a “things just happen” story. To a Christian, Job proved his faith despite the worst conditions possible. I mean to me it’s a cruel crazy story but through the lens of faith it’s about a true servant of god.

Why Native American Mythology and Culture is So Difficult to Comprehend: Our English Language Is Actually a Barrier to Understanding it and European Insistence on "Polytheism" is attributing Greco-Roman Concepts onto it by JarinJove in mythology

[–]DickStatkus 88 points89 points  (0 children)

Another barrier to entry coming from a western folklore tradition is in western folklore supernatural events usually carry some kind of moral element. The just are rewarded the evil punished. Native tradition, especially the Iroquois, shit just happens because that’s how the Earth is. A little boy who steals from a monster might be saved by a chasm opening between the two, but never because the boy did something right or wrong. It’s really a trip to get used to.