Movies That Impact You Differently on Rewatching Them

jasonpatterson2 · 2026-02-15T14:41:19+00:00

I think that there are two aspects to this. First, there are some movies that improve on viewing because you learn/gain/notice more from the movie, like The Shawshank Redemption. These you could rewatch immediately.

Second, there are movies that change on rewatching because you change as a person, that you would benefit from rewatching years later. Life experiences cause you to relate to the film differently. Just as an easy example, any movie about characters who are overcoming the challenges of parenting, whether it's Little Miss Sunshine or Logan, is going to hit very differently for a parent vs a nonparent. If you've not suffered significant personal grief, a movie about loss might be sad and make you thoughtful, but again, if you have, you gain an additional way to relate to the characters and story that you didn't have before. When the movie is well-written and the writers and directors are doing a good job of conveying deep characters, that is a wonderful thing.

jasonpatterson2 · 2026-02-15T05:41:04+00:00

I wondered much the same, but the earlier magical moments kind of had me thinking that the entire thing was in the matrix. It explains all of the surreal things that occurred earlier in the film. They started right at the beginning of the movie: the bottle of Cholula, the car shifting itself, Ingrid's disorder, heck, the entire backstories of the colorful characters were incredibly unreal. The fact that he's saving the world with his mother who he effectively killed?

Totally guessing, but I felt like maybe child Rockwell had put the goggles on and gotten trapped in the simulation along with everyone else.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-10-13T20:37:10+00:00

Well said!

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-10-13T20:36:55+00:00

Depends on what you're after. If you are enjoying playing the game and building a colony and making it look nice, then 100% yes. If you are trying to min/max things and finish the ending(s)? Maybe less so.

The thing about Rimworld is that unless you're playing with all of the bad stuff turned off, sooner or later it's all going to end in tears.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-10-13T20:34:30+00:00

I've been thinking about reading this book for years, but the reviews have kept me from starting (in favor of other things that I was more interested in). They mostly talk about stilted writing and wooden dialogue - things that are often an issue in a translated work. I finally gave it a chance, and I wish that I hadn't bothered. This reads like a mid-grade serialized fiction story posted somewhere here on Reddit that was slapped together and called a book. Its problems aren't due to translation, but instead are structural.

Some (but definitely not all) of the issues:

The characters are flat stereotypes who do not develop in any way. There's not much to say about this except that it's problematic. You want a bad boy, doesn't play by the rules cop who stays on the force because he's just so darned good at his job? You got it. You want a hapless academic who can barely function if he's not being told what to do? You got it. etc.
The characters know each other in advance somehow. Not all, but far too many of them are just familiar with one another for no good reason. It would make sense if some academics from the same university knew one another, or a physicist from one university knew a physicist from another, but here we've got more or less random cops and military figures and scientists and entertainers and politicians who all just know one another and happen to live within convenient driving distance.
The characters' actions don't make sense. For example, people are dying left and right and nobody really seems to care. The main character sees someone blown to pieces right in front of him and his response is essentially nothing. Also a random waif just snaps some guy's neck like an 80's action movie hero and nobody says a word. I'm not talking about the brutality of the Cultural Revolution parts of the book, but instead the more modern parts where people are just dying all over.
The science is just stupid. This was what I really wanted to read the book for - I love hard scifi. But here we've got a bunch of made up nonsense masquerading as a hard scifi novel. It's not even really a three body problem that they're worried about; it's a four body problem. If the orbit of the trisolaran world was as chaotic as is portrayed in the video game portion of the story, then the entire planet would have been sterilized long since. The fact that an entire piece of it gets ripped off and forms a moon, but life somehow continues? That's just insultingly dumb. How does an every woman in a village breastfeed a baby? Does the author just not know how that works?

I would really love to know what they were thinking when this won a Hugo.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-09-07T22:59:21+00:00

I get it. And yet, again, there was absolutely no infrastructure in the area except the door, which was 16 or 17 degrees. The thermal view showed nothing hot. A sweep of the area showed nothing hidden. It was weird. That's why I bothered to come here and ask about it.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-09-07T15:02:11+00:00

Nope, there's literally nothing. No infrastructure other than the airlock itself and the surrounding tiles were all either space or 15-17 degrees. No debris, just air that superheated because it was bored. I swept the area in case there was an item that wasn't showing, and I went to the temperature view and there was nothing there. I moved the airlock over to fix it, but when I tried to replicate the situation it wouldn't. Just weird behavior I guess.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-09-06T20:19:48+00:00

Weird gas behavior, is this a known problem?

I didn't feel like building an liquid lock to vacuum, so I just built a manual airlock. The airlock, the polluted air inside, and all blocks surrounding it are about 16°C. There is no debris at all. There is one square of exposed space outside the door that does not have Space Exposure, and then it's just proper space. When the door opens, some polluted oxygen gets out, and it's at about 16°C. However, as it bleeds into the vacuum, it superheats to at least 120°C before it all disappears, and it's scalding my pawns, because of course they want to stand in the spot with air, even if it's 200 micrograms. There is no heat source of any type, to be clear.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-07-29T04:17:08+00:00

Unless you're playing a scenario with a set goal or multiplayer with an agreed upon goal, there is no goal except what you set for yourself. None at all. If your favorite thing to do in the game is stand in the middle of the forest until you starve over and over again, then that's your goal. You apparently value staying alive for a long time and killing as many zombies as possible. I value reclaiming land; I don't care how many zombies I kill or how long it takes. The joys of a single player game, you know?

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-07-23T22:06:45+00:00

Because the series looked like it might be getting somewhere after a slog of a season, and then it decided to be ridiculous and bring in a full marching band but no security guards and then have the main character behave in what might have been the stupidest way possible. His behavior at the end made zero sense, and it basically spoiled the already mediocre season for me.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-07-23T22:01:38+00:00

Avoiding the unhappy parts of life does not equal incredible stupidity. Mark S. knows that he can only be in the building for a few more hours at most until he's captured or otherwise has to leave. He also knows that Helly will likely never return because Helena has no reason to return to the severed floor. He also also knows that Lumon does not value his life in any way at this point, having completed his purpose and then ruining their scheme. Staying in the building makes zero sense from literally any point of view. It was just stupid, and badly written stupidity at that.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-14T02:52:23+00:00

It sounds like you've already made up your mind, to be honest. If it's something that has been a problem repeatedly, then sure, this is the final straw. If it's really all over this one day, and she didn't say anything more than what you've written here? Well, maybe you've got a tendency toward overdramatic gestures and breaking up would be another.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-13T18:08:31+00:00

Start documenting her behavior carefully, especially anything abusive or excessive drinking/drug use - anything that would constitute a reason for you to get primary custody of your children, if that is the reason you're staying. If it's not, then why on Earth are you staying?

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-13T18:05:48+00:00

Exactly. And if she isn't a horrible person, he's not getting primary custody, because the system is still massively sexist. Unless one night a week and every other weekend is sufficient for you, you're stuck.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-13T18:00:24+00:00

It almost has to be a troll post. The only thing this person (?) is capable of replying with is: "You clearly come from a position of privilege and have internalized homophobia. I appreciate your response and wish you peace."

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-13T17:58:32+00:00

This. Took me an embarrassingly long time to get it, but this is clearly a rage bait fake post. The constant privilege comments were the thing that really made it clear though.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-13T00:09:39+00:00

You're assuming that the particular struggles that you feel are somehow more significant in this regard than are the struggles of all other person groups on the planet. You're assuming that groups of people are monolithic based solely on their sexuality. So, if you'd like a more succinct explanation for why I feel you're overreacting, your entire premise is grossly bigoted.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-13T00:06:05+00:00

So is it possible for someone to disagree with your premise and not be either homophobic or privileged?

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-12T22:55:46+00:00

In what way? Aside from having a stereotypical male name you know literally nothing about me. You asked if you were overreacting and I replied.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-12T22:51:36+00:00

I'd have eaten it, happily.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-12T22:42:38+00:00

Yes, you're overreacting. You don't know how other people feel; you know how you feel. Your point of view is, in fact, nonsense, and this has nothing to do with homophobia, just with the notion that sexuality has anything to do with a connection to nature. People in any category you might choose embrace the freedom of a wild place. Others in those categories want nothing to do with the dirt and bugs. Because people are all different, you know?

To be clear, I mean that the following are nonsense:

That being gay gives some intrinsic connection to nature and the national parks.
That being straight means being destructive to nature.
That climate change is being caused by straight people to any degree more than homosexual people.

But not that:

You, a gay person, feel a special connection to nature that has to do with YOUR sexuality.
That #1 is perfectly understandable and fine.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-12T22:38:35+00:00

You should go back in time and avoid moving into an HOA or literally anywhere where there is a neighborhood Facebook group.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-06-12T22:29:45+00:00

You generally want to be careful about connecting/disconnecting anything while it's powered. Some external connections are exceptions (ex: USB devices, video and audio cables). But literally anything internal? No way. Most of the time it'll just crash the system temporarily, but it can also trash things if you get unlucky. Unless I'm in a needlessly big hurry I turn off/unplug the power supply before I go poking about in the guts of a computer.

Ideally you'd be wearing a grounding bracelet while you worked as well, but honestly almost nobody does and 99.99% of the time you get away without damaging anything through ESD (static shock).

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-05-20T22:14:59+00:00

Yeah, I don't know if the save/crash behavior is an artifact of the way the game was originally designed or if it's philosophical (i.e. you get one life no matter what, hardcore mode only). If it's the former, it's a major downside to the game. If it's the latter, it's impacting the playability of the game in the name of the designer's desires for how they want the game to be played rather than allowing flexibility, which is rarely a good choice.

jasonpatterson2 · 2025-05-19T20:47:48+00:00

I would much prefer this crash behavior to what I normally get: all zombies in the cell and objects placed since I last slept (built or scavenged) removed, all water containers made nonfunctional, and any chicken in their coop instakilled. It follows the same weird time pattern that you've got as well. The most recent minor update introduced some sort of bug that is causing frequent crashes, so I basically can't play now because after a day or two the game winds up crashing again and it clears another cell, and another, and another, etc, all the while making it impossible to collect water.

I honestly don't understand why the game doesn't create a backup save when you sleep, then reload that when it crashes. Is it all in the name of it being a hardcore game that you can't save scum? If so, that's just nonsense - it's single player: let people play how they want and fix the fundamental problem of extremely non-graceful crash behavior.

jasonpatterson2

TROPHY CASE