XIXAX Film Forum

Recent Posts

Quentin Tarantino / Re: Once Upon A Time In Hollywood
« Last post by eward on May 21, 2019, 10:16:27 AM »
The Small Screen / Re: What shows are you watching?
« Last post by wilberfan on May 21, 2019, 12:50:58 AM »

On April 26, 1986, the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine, Soviet Union suffered a massive explosion that released radioactive material across Belarus, Russia and Ukraine and as far as Scandinavia and western Europe. Chernobyl dramatizes the story of the 1986 accident, one of the worst man-made catastrophes in history, and the sacrifices made to save Europe from the unimaginable disaster.

Really well done, with an excellent cast.  There's a fascinating "official" podcast episode for each episode in which host Peter Sagal talks with the creator/writer.  A disturbingly high percentage of what we see in each episode is historically accurate. 
The Small Screen / Re: Game of Thrones (spoilers)
« Last post by Lottery on May 20, 2019, 09:41:46 PM »
I get that Yara had good reason to be loyal but I couldn't take Yara's impassioned vengeance seriously after she meekly submitted to Stark rule after Tyrion's rambling about stories. She had been granted independence earlier in the series by Dany and now she submits to the Starks instead of angrily walking out and claiming independence like Sansa. Not to mention, she should look around the city and see what freeing the city of from Cersei resulted in. Statements about freeing people from tyrants are a bit silly considering Dany's actions. But this may simply be the result of Ironborn stupidity.
Like Jaime Lannister killed the king, was pardoned and then became bodyguard for the next king (as in there's a precedent for forgiveness- I think Jaime chose to be Kingsguard for Robert). Bran and Sansa could do the same for Jon.
Loyalty to Dany doesn't mean much considering that her Dothraki horde didn't go on a killing spree, hunting down Jon, it's like a cultural thing for them. They listen to no one except Dany and themselves. Dorne is a vague nothing at this stage with their unnamed Prince. And if he's a relative of Doran, he should be pretty happy Ellaria and friends are dead.
Ultimately, I'm just happy that Jon makes the choice to go beyond the wall.
The Small Screen / Re: Game of Thrones (spoilers)
« Last post by Jeremy Blackman on May 20, 2019, 09:04:07 PM »
I don't know why people think Greyworm was the only one who wanted Jon punished. Daenerys still had loyal allies in Westeros, like the Greyjoys and Dornish, who were upset about her death. Yara tells us that in this episode.
The Small Screen / Re: Game of Thrones (spoilers)
« Last post by Lottery on May 20, 2019, 08:06:36 PM »
With Bran, the writers knew the implications but didn't have the balls to strongly state this about their potentially immortal, omniscient, 'ends justify the means', mind-controlling, time-warping demon god. Or they simply didn't give this enough thought. Like Martin told them but they didn't really get it and just went with it because this plot point is the answer to series-long 'who gets the throne' question. And that the other leaders so easily accepted him is a bit surprising. Either way, this isn't the sweet part of bittersweet.

It's also complicated to believe in Jon's self-sacrifice knowing that the Night's Watch has no reason to exist. And they know that, they make him wonder if it still exists but he doesn't get any response. It makes sense for him to go there by his own will.

Not to mention, the Unsullied weren't going to stay and he has Sansa and Bran to pardon him. It wasn't a real punishment. I would say he could visit Winterfell whenever he likes but in the end, it seems like he's choosing to leave the NW/the south behind and going to the place where he might find peace, so it's a bit like that lovely ending were a certain hobbit chooses to go to Valinor. He's suffered enough.

I just remembered how hilarious it was when Davos suggested that Unsullied should start a house. There were a few cartoonish moments like that one.
The Small Screen / Re: What shows are you watching?
« Last post by polkablues on May 20, 2019, 07:25:02 PM »
A couple Netflix originals that just came out that are worth everybody's time:


There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical of this one. It's yet another zombie thing. It's a ostensible prequel to Z Nation, the show that was seemingly based on the pitch, "The Walking Dead, but intentionally bad." It's produced by The Asylum, the company behind such masterpieces as the Sharknado hexalogy and the Pacific Rim ripoff titled... *deep sigh*... "Atlantic Rim." There's no reason to expect this to be good.

EXCEPT IT IS. It eschews the bloat and soap opera melodrama of The Walking Dead in favor of a sparse, starkly minimalist, intensely focused narrative. There's a single story being told here: people are trying to get to a place and there are obstacles making it hard for them to do so. Characters drop in and out of the story organically, characters die abruptly and typically with little fanfare, and notably -- unlike The Walking Dead, where the human characters almost always seem to outmatch the zombies and are only in danger when they really fuck up somehow -- the stakes feel truly life and death at almost any given moment. Dialogue is scarce, and there are long sections where we're just following a character or characters, the tension building the whole time, and when that tension breaks it goes off like a pipe bomb. There are only a few points across eight episodes where it feels like it goes too over the top and you're reminded of the show's provenance, but it does so much right that it was easy for me to forgive those moments.


It suffers from some shaky writing, especially at the beginning, but the ideas it's grappling with, and the weight with which it treats them, is really the selling point. I'm about two-thirds of the way through the season, and while I'm questioning whether it will be able to pull off the more fantastical elements of the premise, the grounded elements are dead on. How is power allocated outside an established order? What's the human cost of exerting that power, and the psychological cost on those who have been thrust into position to make impossible choices for the greater good?

Also, Kathryn Newton, who was so good in the last season of Halt and Catch Fire, so good in the movie Blockers, and so good in Big Little Lies, is SO GOOD in this. When she's winning Oscars in the next few years, know that I called it here first. 
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: Untitled PTA Project (2020)
« Last post by wilberfan on May 20, 2019, 03:33:41 PM »
This is the last quote we got from PTA on the script, right?

Yeah but the whole 600 page thing was generally considered to be hyperbole that the movie outlets all decided to run with.

Exactly.  Thank you.  It bothers me that--in the name of clicks, I suppose--so many sites ran with that...
The Small Screen / Re: Game of Thrones (spoilers)
« Last post by Drenk on May 20, 2019, 03:28:56 PM »
Tyrion is more or less the King now, Bran is just a pretext. Why do he wants a Master of Whispers if he can, literally, know everything that is happening? Because he won't do or say anything: he truly doesn't care even if he promised to Sansa that he will rule. He won't. But Bran will die and they'll have someone else and it will...just be the same. (If he's the raven, he probably will live a thousand years? But even that isn't clear.)

I've also been reminded that he didn't appear for a whole season at some point. (Five, I think?)

It's also complicated to believe in Jon's self-sacrifice knowing that the Night's Watch has no reason to exist. And they know that, they make him wonder if it still exists but he doesn't get any response. It makes sense for him to go there by his own will.
The Director's Chair / Re: Robert Eggers
« Last post by jenkins on May 20, 2019, 02:49:14 PM »
Here it is hardcore chiming with a critic actually


I donít think metacritic tells me crap
The Small Screen / Re: Game of Thrones (spoilers)
« Last post by polkablues on May 20, 2019, 02:39:32 PM »
I was overall satisfied, but the show's apparent disinterest in exploring the scope of Bran's powers and the implications thereof is perhaps its biggest remaining weakness now that it's all wrapped up. It's HEAVILY implied that he is capable of seeing the future, which means that free will is an illusion and all events are predestined to happen. That's an incredibly heavy and important issue to just shrug off. We've seen him literally affecting past events from the present; are the Tower of Joy and the creation of Hodor the only two times that has ever or will ever happen, or are there countless moments throughout their history that he had a (witting or unwitting) hand in? Does he actually care in any way about doing good, helping people, ruling justly, etc., or is he just seeing to it that events play out the way they're meant to play out? These are earth-shatteringly huge questions in the context of the overarching story, and the show seemed content to just kind of say, "Don't worry about it."