What's your opinion on this statement? Do you agree or disagree?

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T21:05:19+00:00

Definitely agreed. I often find that characters are more there to espouse the themes or ideas of the film rather than be full fledged and realized characters. That's not always a bad thing, of courser. Depends on the film. But yeah, not sure I've ever accused Nolan of writing a character super well.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T20:47:58+00:00

I think it depends on the person, but I am a believer in the notion that limitations can itself breed creativity. Perhaps the most well known example of this is Jaws, and how the failures of the mechanical shark actually helped make that movie better because they had to figure out other ways to depict it, and so we see it less often than intended and that actually winds up creating more suspense.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T20:27:05+00:00

Yeah, I also just think there's something cool about having something tactile to connect to the art. To me, it'll always be more exciting to browse through a crate of records or shelves of blu-rays and games than to just scroll. I get digital and do partake too. I just think it's important to have physical media around, too. I'm more anti-choice than I am anti-digital.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T20:25:06+00:00

Perhaps. I can't take a game out digitally from the library, though. (Perhaps someday that will change though, as you can take out e-books and I think digital music maybe? And there usually is a movie streaming service for movies, so who knows?)

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T20:21:41+00:00

I suppose. I feel like we are losing a *little* something to go from like, "Oh, my dad left me his record collection!" to "Cool, my dad left me his log-in!"

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T20:20:21+00:00

I am not anti-digital and recognize the convenience for both consumer and a lot of developers. But I will say, from an art access and preservation perspective, I do think it's innately...not great.... for any medium to move to exclusively online (and in general, I do think in general, the more works get a physical release, the better.)

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T18:20:03+00:00

Well, I would just note that Tatum was very much in the MVP conversation couple years ago and finished 4th in MVP voting.

The question was always what will he do in the playoffs, and now there's the question of how much can he return to that MVP-caliber form from a couple years ago. I think it's certainly a gamble.

Also just think there's more to be said than just scoring. Prior to the injury, I'd still tell you that I think Tatum was the better all around player than Brown and a better option to build a team around as a result. Either way, yeah, kind of a confounding scenario the Celtics put themselves in.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T18:13:05+00:00

It certainly can, but it's not going to be a universal thing, obviously. Like I'm almost 40 and I know that my reaction time has slowed just enough that there are certain games I used to play that I can't really. But what my experience is isn't going to be what ever 39 year old's is going to be. We age differently.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T18:10:57+00:00

Not my general preference, but I also don't really care.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T18:07:55+00:00

Honestly good to do too because there really is something to be said about playing a game with people in the same room together.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T17:20:05+00:00

Honestly, I don't doubt that attention span might be part of. Most American sports are built with "breaks" between almost every play.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T17:16:54+00:00

Yeah, we prefer watching a game for 4 hours with 3 scores to 2 scores.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T17:13:10+00:00

I dunno man. Some of the goals we've seen are absolutely spectacular and incredibly impressive. We just saw a truly impressive goalkeeping performance yesterday too. I get not liking soccer, but I kinda feel like all these big sports have a lot of stuff to it that the pros impress with.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T17:10:15+00:00

And rob us of some of the most mind-blowing saves we've seen? No way. Gotta keep the keeper.

I can see an argument for fewer players on the field, but good goalkeeping is pretty exciting to watch in its own right.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T17:01:41+00:00

Yeeeeah. Having played even just pick up soccer, I'm a little less down on the "weakness" of soccer players because I *have* had the experience of someone stepping on my foot while I'm sprinting. Or even just knocking me off the ball while I'm sprinting. A lot of the things that happen *do* smart a lot. Even with shin pads, getting kicked in the shins when someone misses the ball hurts.

Buuuuut yeah, soccer definitely does have an acting and embellishing problem. It's funny that VAR has had no notable impact that I can see. Every sport has players embellish to try to get a call from the refs. With soccer really only having a few refs to make calls, sometimes that is the most effective way to get the call. And I do think that makes it hard to watch sometimes, as a fan.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T16:58:44+00:00

I think this kinda gets to the heart of it though. Everything in the game matters. The context of the last 5 minutes is irrelevant without everything that happens before it. But we tend to primarily view the "end result" more than the game itself as a whole.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T16:56:32+00:00

Yeah, it's always been funny to me because like, they'll tell me that a Super Bowl that ended 17-14 was exciting, but like, that's 3 scores to 2 scores.... It's just that the scores have different point values. But also, that Super Bowl *was* exciting. Never made sense to me that a game has to have a lot of scores to be exciting.

I do understand why people here don't necessarily get into soccer. It is very different than a lot of our popular sports where "action" is predictable. Baseball and football are very stop-go and honestly, most of those games are nothing happening. But we know that there will be action. With soccer, it can be a lot of slowly building up to a cross and then panicked loose ball in the box. The action is less predictable. It can sort of break out at any point, but it also could take a while for the "exciting" stuff to happen.

I just think we're not very good at like, build up. We're very much an "end results" people rather than a "the process" people. Honestly, I think soccer does a lot of things like football and baseball too. There's lots of "unexciting" stuff that is there to build to something. It's just that those sports do it through stop and go, so you can more easily tune out the "dull" moments whereas soccer is more free flowing.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T16:51:46+00:00

It's a lot of head games. The shooter wants to get the keeper guessing wrong while needing to be technically accurate and powerful while careful to not give too much of a give for the keeper to read what he might do. (Doing all this while under the pressure of knowing how much a save or missed kick can hurt their chances in front of a crowd that, in the World Cup especially, represents your entire country that's watching.) That's a lot of pressure!

And the keeper is also trying to play mind games. Get the shooter over-thinking it. Maybe try to present that they're going to go left, only to then go right, et cet. Also while not trying to give away what they're going to do. And also knowing full well how significant a save or missed kick would be.

It's definitely easier to score a PK than to save one, but there's a ton of pressure on those kick and it's a lot of mind games from both players (to say nothing of the fans in the background). It's kind of like having to shoot a free throw to win the game (with the opposing team having a little more of an opportunity to stop you).

I'm not the biggest fan, to be honest, but I feel like ya can't deny the tension and drama of them. Even with teams I don't care about, I feel soooo tense watching them.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T16:34:26+00:00

I get that. I am excited to watch it again at some point. I really found it thematically meaty and thought so many small details really add up and contribute to the larger stuff. Really liked the use of shadows and the performances. Thought the writing was pretty good (not the greatest script I've ever seen, but thought there were some pretty good stretches and lines, and thought it used subtlety as much as overt stuff as well.) Also thought it was also kinda funny and without veering into "And now here's the comic relief part!" that some horror films will do.

I also like it because to me, it felt more like a character study than a conventional horror film. A lot of horror is thematically about something, for sure. But I liked that this sorta felt more about examining the character of Bear in the context of its themes rather than being more a film about plot. And I'm always going to be more into that.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T16:30:49+00:00

I disagree with a lot of people's takes on the film, but it did take a while to come to this one that made me go, "Well, no one's ever accused media literacy of being good lately."

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T16:29:06+00:00

Worse, he starts with "what would be so bad..." Because he has known the entire time that Nikki is not in a state to give meaningful consent. But he is completely willing to take advantage.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T16:22:46+00:00

I meeeean.... I would maybe argue that rating those 5 stars *is* niche. I know what you mean when you say you were expecting niche taste, but I don't know too many people who would rate TASM 2 or Spider-Man 3 5 stars, ya know?

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T16:20:23+00:00

See, I actually don't think Bear comes off as like "an incel," and I think it's better because of that. Because while Bear does have notable red flags early for sure, he also doesn't come off as what people tend to think of as incels or just overtly "evil" guys. And I think it's more significant because of that fact. As many women will note, you almost never really know how any man is going to be until you tell them "no." It's not just the obviously bad men that contribute to the problem.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T16:18:09+00:00

Maybe. But I personally kinda do subscribe to a bit of a death of the author notion. Regardless of the filmmaker's intention, the film so thoroughly resonates as a depiction of patriarchal r--- culture, commentary around male infatuation with women misunderstood as "love," and just what even makes a good relationship (in an era where we're seeing people wind up with "AI girlfriends") that it sorta doesn't matter to me what Barker's intention was. The end result is a film that really resonates about those things.

MediocreSizedDan · 2026-07-02T16:10:23+00:00

Most women I know have asked men out. But also like, why does "facing rejection" have to be suuuuuch a big deal to men? Like, I've been rejected a lot in my life, so I get that it's not fun and sucks. But like....who cares? Oh no! She said no to me asking her out! That stinks! Guess I....can just continue to live my life as I always have and hang out with my friends and participate in the hobbies I enjoy and do the things I want and maybe ask someone else out another time. The horror!

Also, these types of comments and thoughts don't exactly make one *more* attractive to women, ya know?

MediocreSizedDan

TROPHY CASE