fantastic_four

It's the equivalent of getting your house robbed because you leave the key to your door under your front mat.

At first I wasn't sure if it was Mars or Jupiter, but they made a point of having the huge "eye" of Jupiter in the shot presumably so you could identify it.

So last episode it seemed like Lindelof was implying that Veidt is on Earth's moon, but this episode he got outside of his dome and Jupiter was sitting large in the background. So I guess he's on one of the 53+ moons of Jupiter?

This thread never fails to surprise me in how it's CONSTANTLY buzzing...I just wish it wasn't the kind of buzzing that you'd usually hear around a manure pile.

You absolutely need to either read Watchmen or see the movie for most of this series to make sense to you. And if you only see the movie and aren't aware of the huge difference in the ending from the comic then the squid references will confuse you. An non-spoiler example of this is that Rorshach's mask becomes iconic in the show's society. But if you never saw or read Watchmen you won't even know what the mask is in reference to.

Why do I keep looking at that picture and waiting for a chipmunk or bluejay to scurry out of Radagast's beard?

Alright, I'm torn on whether or not we should be able to openly discuss this show given that there's a huge spoiler in the first episode that then becomes the entire first season of the series from then on. You can't discuss this show at all without that one spoiler being spoiled. But do we really have to put everything in spoiler tags when we discuss the show? So given that...how, exactly, could a species evolve to take 100+ years to no longer be a mostly-helpless infant? I can't rule it out, but it seems so unlikely. Predators would pick them off at a young age. The answer the show appears to be giving to that implicit question is that even though they're infants, they're so strong in the Force that they can protect themselves as this one did in episode 2. But he zonked out RIGHT after using the Force...so doesn't that still make them mostly helpless? The only way this makes sense to me is if their home planet had very few predators for whatever reason. That, or they had huge litters of 10+ kids, which is the way many species on Earth survive, there are just so many of them that at least one or two make it through childhood.

My guess is it was Yoda balancing himself on top of Yaddle. Attachment is forbidden for Jedi, but that doesn't necessarily preclude them being DTF.

I want one.

I figured that too, but his first shot went through the bubble, so what were the shots after that for? I'd ask where he got a trebuchet from, but I suppose the answer is just "he's a genius."

So Veidt is on the moon, not Mars? That shot where it zoomed into the clouds of wherever he is and morphed into a shot of the moon seems to clearly establish him as being on the moon. Why Manhattan cares about any of this is still a complete mystery, isn't it? The scene with Veidt fishing up clone babies and then putting them into what looked like a huge centrifuge with them screaming as it spun was just bizarre and more than a little disturbing.

Why does he have to be ruthless? He was consistent in not being that way, and I was fine with it. He probably wouldn't carry the series being ruthless, it'd turn most viewers off.

I watched the first episode a second time last night. Don't remember the last time I did that for a television show. Freaking awesome show!

Screen grab of the big surprise:

IG-88 is cool as hell.

Given the surprise ending of the first episode I now have the same question I had back in 1999 when Phantom Menace first came out. The nature of the question is a huge spoiler, so I'm burying it for now. I don't think the question was ever answered, but I'm guessing it will be now.

Best show this year. When he finally found his mark my heart soared.

Yep just saw that. Just saw the first episode...A W E S O M E !!!!

I got in via the app about a half-hour ago. I clicked into Endgame and two other movies and all three were downloadable. The Mandalorian is NOT downloadable, and when I went to play it it paused to load every 4-5 seconds for 10+ seconds every pause. I get that it's new and in high demand, but why not make the Mandalorian downloadable? Then I can let it take however long it takes, 5 hours or whatever, and watch it with no streaming load issues. This is Disney's baby, the main thing everyone wants the service today for, but they don't let you download it? Since the sad attempt to watch the Mandalorian I can't get in via the app at all.

Official launch time was 6 AM EST. It's off to exactly the kind of start I expected--can't connect via the app, pages don't load most of the time, haven't been able to get anything to play at all.

Or that Darth Vader and a few stormtroopers are standing right on the edge of one of those hangar bays at the end of Rogue One after Leia's ship escapes mere feet from appearing to be in space. I don't know what's driving most explainable and unexplainable elements across EVERY Star Wars film, just that they've been there all along so I'm not inclined to single out any one film's crew for incompetence over all of the others. I do know that any sufficiently-advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, so I'm not going to assume it's a plot hole every time I see something happen that physics as we understand it doesn't make immediate sense without spending some time hypothesizing technology that could be allowing it to work as depicted in the films.

I assumed the bombs were using the same tech the TIE bombers from Empire Strikes Back used when bombing those asteroids looking for the Millennium Falcon. Insert your favorite tech in for what was propelling them--electromagnetism that's attracted to the natural gravitational field of the largest nearby object, unidirectional propulsion of some sort, or whatever. I don't know what's making most of the ships in Star Wars move in space, but something is. I hate when people don't get something about a film and quickly jump to "the filmmakers screwed up!" Your first question should always be "what is it I might be missing?" The worst cases of this I saw were on the two Matrix sequels and Prometheus...SCORES of critics kept pointing out plot holes in their reviews that weren't plot holes, they were intentionally-designed missing bits of plot that the Wachowskis or Damon Lindelof dropped clues about throughout their works to inspire viewers to piece them together to figure out. If you don't like that style of storytelling, fine...but don't just assume they screwed the plot or story up without thinking it through.

I suspect there's some history with the word "cinema" he's become familiar with as a director whose connotation isn't in the general vernacular. I've never heard anyone distinguish one film as cinema and another as not. But I've long heard artists in multiple media distinguish art from entertainment, so I assumed he meant that, and he did clarify that's what he meant in his Times article.

It’s more a matter of investment of time than snobbery. Same here. I generally enjoyed them, but not tremendously as they're definitely geared towards kids. I saw the first five or six because my ex was a middle school librarian so I watched them with her, but after we broke up I wasn't compelled enough to watch the last two or three, and I haven't seen the two other recent Rowling films based upon the same universe. I liked them enough to look forward to them if my 4-year olds want to see them in a few years.