this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
305 points (96.6% liked)

World News

38979 readers
2465 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Let me try and make this very clear to you the plot and story of the movie was disjointed obtuse muddy and confusing because of the nonlinear structure of it. That is what I'm asserting I am stating it as fact that is objective.

I have cited several movies in previous comments that handle a nonlinear story structure much better than Oppenheimer did such as Reservoir dogs and Pulp Fiction.

Aside from your own personal anecdotal opinion about how much you found the movie to be easy to follow do you have anything to refute my statement?

Please look up the definitions to the $10 words you're using in your $1 sentences.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

That is what I’m asserting I am stating it as fact that is objective.

You've already made your opinion clear.

Aside from your own personal anecdotal opinion about how much you found the movie to be easy to follow do you have anything to refute my statement?

Already been over this in another comment where I explained why I thought Nolan's use of these devices fit for Oppenheimer, this "conversation" was over a while ago. And best of all, Oppenheimer won an academy award for best director, best adapted screenplay, best editing- basically any criteria associated with your "critiques". You don't have to take my word for it, you can defer to much better film critics than either of us.

Please look up the definitions to the $10 words you’re using in your $1 sentences.

Cute.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And best of all, Oppenheimer won an academy award for best director, best adapted screenplay, best editing- basically any criteria associated with your "critiques". You don't have to take my word for it, you can defer to much better film critics than either of us.

And Obama won a nobel Peace prize while bombing several Middle Eastern countries.

What the Academy Awards do is beyond useless. They can be disregarded completely as though they don't exist.

Moreover, Oppenheimer is the kind of derivative schlock most modern film critics will praise because they got their masters in Spanish literature and they think they know what a good storry is.