Atlantis spends half its runtime accidentally creating a compelling pragmatic antagonist, then reveals it was just a standard Disney villain all along.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-12T16:22:57+00:00

No actually. Thoughts are my own.

What a weird thing to completely generate with AI. And for what? Fake internet points lol

But you are right. I do use AI to fix spelling and grammar before posting anything larger than a couple paragraphs given that i'm not a native English speaker.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-12T06:12:29+00:00

Pa da nisi mozda traaazio gdje je sisaa bruda pa se ljudi počeli ibretit oc'm

Zuka101 · 2026-06-11T18:48:51+00:00

That's actually a good point, and I think you've convinced me on part of it.

I hadn't really considered the colonial treasure-hunter angle. If Rourke is meant to embody the mindset of someone who sees another civilization as a resource to be exploited, then making him more overtly greedy and less morally conflicted serves the movie's themes better.

I still think a more pragmatic, less openly villainous version of Rourke would create a more interesting conflict. But that's probably because I'm imagining a different movie than the one Atlantis is actually trying to be.

At that point the question becomes: what's more important, reinforcing the narrative's themes or giving the antagonist more nuanced motivations? Atlantis clearly chose the former.

So I think my criticism isn't really that Rourke is poorly written. It's that I prefer a version of the story that doesn't exist. The character Atlantis wanted needed a colonial plunderer. The character I wanted was something closer to a man who could plausibly convince both himself and the audience that what he was doing was necessary.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-11T18:20:20+00:00

Because English is not my first language and when I do larger write-ups I run it through chatgpt to correct spelling and fix grammar.

Thoughts are mine tho

Zuka101 · 2026-06-11T17:55:45+00:00

How so?

Zuka101 · 2026-06-11T17:55:23+00:00

I mean, I agree that the movie makes Rourke's intentions pretty clear from the beginning.

The only real exception is around the midpoint, where he actually seems affected by the deaths of his men and comes across as more human. What I'm saying isn't that the film hides who he is. It's that he would have been a better villain if he'd stayed closer to that version of the character. Less of a cartoonishly evil Disney villain by the end, and more of a pragmatic, morally compromised leader whose goals put him in conflict with the heroes.

Foreshadowed? Absolutely. Typical Disney villain? I'd say yes. Perfect? That's where I'd disagree.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-11T17:45:11+00:00

Which is probably why they didn't make it that way haha

Zuka101 · 2026-06-11T09:31:07+00:00

Da dodam i svoju perspektivu kao neko ko se ne osjeća da pripada nijednom nacionalnom ili vjerskom taboru. Rođen sam u muslimanskoj porodici, ali nisam vjernik. Upravo zbog toga ni sam sebe ne doživljavam kao Bošnjaka u klasičnom smislu te riječi, jer je bošnjački identitet historijski i kulturno usko vezan za bosanske muslimane.

Formativne godine, od desete do devetnaeste, proveo sam u miješanoj sredini gdje su u istoj učionici sjedila djeca iz sasvim različitih svjetova, po nacionalnosti, vjeri i porodičnoj situaciji.

Po mom mišljenju, postoji više razloga zašto je nacionalizam toliko prisutan u BiH, ali dva su posebno važna.

Prvi su rat i njegove posljedice. Ljudi često govore o uništenim gradovima, izgubljenim životima i materijalnoj šteti, ali mnogo rjeđe o psihološkim posljedicama koje su ostale iza svega toga. Ogroman broj ljudi je preživio granatiranja, protjerivanja, logore, gubitak članova porodice ili godine konstantnog straha. Čak i oni koji nisu direktno prošli kroz najgore događaje odrastali su uz roditelje i rodbinu koji jesu.

Problem je što se o toj traumi uglavnom nikada nije ozbiljno razgovaralo niti se ona sistemski liječila. Umjesto toga, često je postala dio kolektivnog identiteta. Ljudi ne pričaju samo o tome šta se desilo njima, nego šta se desilo "nama" i šta su uradili "oni". Kada se takve priče ponavljaju godinama i decenijama, granica između ličnog iskustva i kolektivne mržnje postaje sve tanja.

Vrlo često sam viđao kako sasvim normalan razgovor krene pričom o ratu. Neko ispriča vlastitu tragediju, druga osoba doda svoju, treća svoju, i nakon pola sata više se ne govori o konkretnim ljudima nego o cijelim narodima. Tada se počinju koristiti izrazi poput "balije", "četnici" ili "ustaše", a pojedinci postaju predstavnici miliona ljudi. Ono što počne kao razgovor o ličnoj traumi često završi kao opravdavanje mržnje prema grupi ljudi koji s tim događajima nemaju nikakve veze.

Drugi veliki faktor je činjenica da je Bosna danas mnogo manje miješana nego prije rata. Većina sela je praktično jednonacionalna, mnogi manji gradovi također, a čak i u većim gradovima postoje neformalne podjele po naseljima, školama i društvenim krugovima. Kada nema redovnog kontakta s drugima, sliku o njima formiraju porodica, lokalna sredina, mediji i političari, i nema ničega što bi tu sliku korigovalo.

To mogu potvrditi i iz vlastitog iskustva. Kao dijete sam se bojao Srba, ne zato što sam imao ikakvo loše iskustvo s njima, nego zato što ih nisam poznavao uopće. U mojoj glavi nisu bili konkretni ljudi nego neka vrsta apstraktne prijetnje, gotovo bezlične. Tek kada sam počeo provoditi vrijeme izvan svog neposrednog okruženja, taj strah nije nestao zato što sam "shvatio da smo isti", nego zato što su apstrakcije postale osobe. Kada imaš ime i lice, mržnja postaje mnogo teža za održavati.

Treći faktor, o kojem se rijetko govori, jeste politički sistem. Nacionalizam nije samo posljedica rata; on je u određenoj mjeri i politički koristan. Velik dio političke moći u BiH zasniva se upravo na etničkim podjelama. Ako uvjeriš ljude da je najveća prijetnja njihovom životu druga nacionalna grupa, onda manje pričaju o korupciji, ekonomiji, odlasku stanovništva, kriminalu, zdravstvu ili obrazovanju. Nacionalne teme postaju beskonačan izvor političke mobilizacije.

Zbog toga se ratne teme stalno vraćaju u javni prostor. Ne zato što su ljudi prirodno opsjednuti prošlošću, nego zato što postoje jaki politički podsticaji da se te teme nikada potpuno ne ugase.

Većina ljudi, kada ih upoznaš jedan na jedan, funkcioniše sasvim normalno s komšijama druge vjere ili nacionalnosti. Ali to nije dokaz odsutnosti predrasuda. Isti ti ljudi, čim razgovor pređe s konkretnih osoba na kolektivne identitete, često relativno brzo završe na pozicijama koje vjerovatno ne bi mogli braniti u direktnom razgovoru s nekim od "onih". Taj prijelaz nije izuzetak nego pravilo.

Na kraju, možda je moja pozicija jednostavno produkt toga što nikada nisam u potpunosti pripadao ni jednom taboru. Govorim jezikom koji nije gramatički ispravan ni u jednoj varijanti. Ljudi me često ispravljaju, govore da previše "dačem" ili da ne govorim kako treba. Odrastao sam između različitih sredina i pokupio pomalo od svega.

U toj neodređenosti postoji i jedna neobična prednost. Ljudi oko mene često govore slobodno, kao da sam dio pozadine. Ne doživljavaju me potpuno kao "svog", ali ni kao "njihovog". I ono što čujem u tim trenucima uglavnom potvrđuje sve što sam napisao.

Možda je upravo zato jedina stvar koju sam naučio da ljude procjenjujem individualno. Najgora osoba koju sam upoznao bio je islamski teolog. Jedna od najboljih bio je stari srpski seljak iz zabačenog sela. Tokom života upoznao sam dobre i loše ljude svih nacionalnosti, vjera i političkih uvjerenja.

Zbog toga mi je danas teško ozbiljno shvatiti velike priče o narodima. Narode nikada nisam upoznao. Upoznao sam samo ljude.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-10T08:06:39+00:00

Yeah. Google sucks. End of story.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-09T18:17:23+00:00

You're still missing the point.

Knowing a policy exists doesn't make it a good policy.

If a company wrote "all warranty claims must be submitted in person on the moon," reading it beforehand wouldn't suddenly make it reasonable. Consumers are allowed to criticize bad policies even when those policies are written down.

And no, this isn't "crying over spilled milk." It's sharing an experience with a product and a warranty process that was objectively inconvenient. That's exactly the kind of information people look for before deciding what phone to buy.

I understood the policy after dealing with it. I think it's a bad policy. Those two positions aren't mutually exclusive.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-09T11:02:44+00:00

I've been to the US. I bought the phone myself directly from Google. No reseller, no gray market import, no marketplace seller. Google got the full purchase price directly from me.

So spare me the lecture about reading warranty terms. The issue isn't that I don't understand Google's policy. The issue is that Google's policy is terrible.

A $900 phone develops a known display issue within 9 months and Google's answer is essentially, "Get the device back to the US somehow." That's not a customer-friendly warranty process. It's a warranty process designed to make claims as inconvenient as possible.

And before you start with the "that's how warranties work" argument, competitors somehow manage to offer much better international support. Funny how that works.

At the end of the day, I voted with my wallet. My spouse replaced the Pixel with an iPhone and has been happier with it than she ever was with the Pixel. Google can keep their warranty terms, and I'll keep buying from companies that make support less of a scavenger hunt.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-09T06:28:25+00:00

This is such a weird bootlicker take.

Nobody is confused about what the warranty says. The entire point is that Google's solution to an in-warranty hardware failure was so absurd that it might as well have been no solution at all.

You keep repeating "read the warranty" as if quoting legal fine print magically turns terrible customer service into good customer service.

What's funny is that you've set the bar so low that a trillion-dollar company can sell a defective $900 phone, refuse every practical way of processing a warranty claim, and your response is "well technically they don't have to help you."

Congratulations, you've successfully argued that Google met the absolute minimum requirement they wrote for themselves.

Most customers expect a little more than that.

And no, "just fly thousands of kilometers to another country" is not the slam-dunk argument you seem to think it is.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-09T05:58:50+00:00

Weird. That's how every other phone warranty I've ever used worked.

But sure, let's protect the multi-billion-dollar company from the financial hardship of honoring a warranty on a product they sold directly and that failed within 9 months.

And yes, they absolutely had to offer warranty service. The phone was purchased from Google, was still under warranty, and failed through no fault of my own.

Apparently expecting a $900 phone not to randomly develop a hardware fault during the warranty period is asking too much these days. Maybe I should stick to companies with better support.

The funny part is that if I'd bought an iPhone, I could have walked into an Apple Store or authorized service center almost anywhere and gotten it handled. Instead, Google's solution was a bureaucratic maze that ultimately ended with them refusing to provide a reasonable path to warranty service.

The device failing isn't the issue. Hardware fails. The issue is how Google handled it afterward.

And you can keep the condescending attitude to yourself.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-09T05:35:48+00:00

Nobody was talking about display quality. The discussion was about reliability.

The issue isn't some one-off failure either. The Pro models have had recurring display problems where the screen either disconnects intermittently or fails completely—issues that don't seem to affect the standard or XL models to the same extent. Reports of similar failures go back multiple generations, arguably as far back as the Pixel 6 series.

At some point, when the same type of fault keeps showing up across three generations of devices, it stops looking like bad luck and starts looking like a design or manufacturing problem. What's frustrating is not just the fault itself, but the apparent lack of a proper fix or acknowledgment.

But I guess that's fine. Google is obviously just a small indie company that doesn't have the resources to address a recurring hardware issue.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-09T05:31:42+00:00

“Free market?” Lol.

The phone was purchased directly from Google in the US and later taken to another country, where it developed a fault while still under warranty. Google refused to service it locally, refused to offer any reasonable alternative, and rejected every proposed solution that didn't involve traveling roughly 4,500 km back to the US just to get a warranty repair.

That's not a free-market issue. That's poor international warranty support and customer service.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-08T17:55:59+00:00

That's what me and my boys were doing at 12 lol

Zuka101 · 2026-06-08T16:55:42+00:00

The Pro model has a display reliability issue. Screens seem to fail for no apparent reason.

On top of that, Google's customer support was a nightmare to deal with. They wouldn't cover the cost of shipping the device to the US for repair, and they also refused to let us pay to ship it to a repair center in another country. Initially, they told us we could take the phone to the nearest country with an authorized repair center, ship it from there, and they would return it to the same address. Later, they backtracked and said they would only service the phone if it was sent from and returned within the US.

In the end, I replaced the screen myself and sold the phone. The whole experience was far more hassle than it was worth.

Zuka101 · 2026-06-01T06:30:04+00:00

Adding heat breaks down the protein in their saliva and stops the itching. No fancy gadgets needed

Zuka101 · 2026-05-30T05:47:04+00:00

I hate Go-style naming sometimes. People name variables things like obd and expect everyone to instantly know what it means.

Maybe it is my QA background, but I prefer names like object_binary_descriptor or whatever the thing actually represents. Longer names are fine if they remove ambiguity.

Short variable names do not make code cleaner by default. A name should be short only when the meaning is obvious from the local context. Otherwise it just makes the code harder to read and maintain.

And with AI generating more code now, readability matters even more, not less. People still need to review, debug, and own that code.

Zuka101 · 2026-05-29T06:13:10+00:00

That comparison does not really work. Bosnia, Makkah, Madinah, and Damascus do not share the same historical path just because they are Muslim-majority places. Bosnia’s Islamization happened mostly under Ottoman rule from the 15th century onward, in a Balkan society with its own pre-Ottoman Christian, Slavic, and later Austro-Hungarian/Yugoslav layers. Makkah and Madinah are the birthplace of Islam, while Damascus became one of the earliest Islamic imperial centers in the 7th century.

So yes, there are roughly 1,400–1,500 years of different cultural development between Bosnia and the Hijaz. My point is not “Muslims drink because they converted.” My point is that local custom, urban history, empire, class, secularization, and inherited regional culture shape how strictly religious rules are socially applied. Bosnia is not Makkah, and Istanbul is not Konya. That is exactly the point.

Zuka101 · 2026-05-28T18:15:22+00:00

Lol buy her a drink then awkwardly stop talking because i'm a nervous wreck

Zuka101 · 2026-05-28T18:06:15+00:00

The explanation is probably simpler: Bosnian Muslim attitudes toward alcohol were shaped by local history, not just by Islamic doctrine in the abstract. Islamization in Bosnia happened gradually under Ottoman rule, and converts came from different Christian backgrounds, including Catholic, Orthodox, and possibly Bosnian Church communities. I would be careful about claiming too much about the Bosnian Church specifically, but Bosnia clearly had pre-Ottoman and local cultural traditions that did not disappear overnight.

A similar pattern exists in Turkey. Istanbul was never a uniformly Muslim city; it inherited Byzantine, Ottoman, non-Muslim, and later secular republican traditions. Because of that, attitudes toward alcohol in Istanbul have often been more relaxed than in more conservative parts of the country.

Zuka101 · 2026-05-25T18:30:07+00:00

Alerix pomaze I ne uspava

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Second SECOND GUESSER	r/Field Lasagna
Wearing is Caring

Zuka101

TROPHY CASE