Finally got around to watching the second half, which I thought was an improvement on the first half.
Still found the direction and dialogue annoying but it wasn’t quite as bad as the start.
He scene in the credits was funny.
Film Don’t Look Up
- Thread starter Pexbo
- Start date
Still found the direction and dialogue annoying but it wasn’t quite as bad as the start.
He scene in the credits was funny.
I did chuckle when he was shooting at the sky at the endI loved it.
Ron Pearlman was great in the few scenes he had.
"And to all you gays out there... "
I liked it. It wasn;t the best film ever or anything but I thought it was a good watch and despite the ridiculousness of it, not far off what would exactly happen in that situation and basically what is happening now already.
You'll never take me aliveI did chuckle when he was shooting at the sky at the end
Just watched it. I liked it... Pretty much real life too.
I liked the song. The second half of it was pretty... real.
I enjoyed it.
The recurring joke on the snacks was great
The recurring joke on the snacks was great
Wow, just wow. Really impressive movie and I wish the movie was a bit longer.
The opinions were a bit split when it first came out, people were complaining about the acting for example, so the movie wasn't on my to-watch list. However, even news sites were publishing articles regarding the movie, so I had to watch it.
You really feel for the scientists as I too started to get disillusioned, angry and powerless by the ignorance of people in the movie.
I understand why Leonardo DiCaprio, Meryl Streep and Jennifer Lawrence wanted to join the cast, because the movie raises so many ethical and social issues, that, even though it is a disaster movie like Deep Impact and Armageddon, it's on a totally different level.
The only thing I didn't like was the minimal involvement of other countries like Russia, China, Japan, India, EU countries during the whole movie. For example, I think China would never leave it so late to try and deflect the comet and trust America to solve this global disaster. And they for sure won't trust an eccentric president like Orlean.
The opinions were a bit split when it first came out, people were complaining about the acting for example, so the movie wasn't on my to-watch list. However, even news sites were publishing articles regarding the movie, so I had to watch it.
You really feel for the scientists as I too started to get disillusioned, angry and powerless by the ignorance of people in the movie.
I understand why Leonardo DiCaprio, Meryl Streep and Jennifer Lawrence wanted to join the cast, because the movie raises so many ethical and social issues, that, even though it is a disaster movie like Deep Impact and Armageddon, it's on a totally different level.
The only thing I didn't like was the minimal involvement of other countries like Russia, China, Japan, India, EU countries during the whole movie. For example, I think China would never leave it so late to try and deflect the comet and trust America to solve this global disaster. And they for sure won't trust an eccentric president like Orlean.
Last edited:
I just watched it now. I left a review in the movie thread (conclusion: strong first half, weaker second half, some distraction, so overall a bit uneven), but I am amazed how a lot of reviewers seem to think a movie like this could have really changed something, if only it would have been more subtle. If the climate change debate shows anything, it's that it is very difficult to change people's minds on the subject, and you really can't expect that from an allegorical satire. This film 'just' laughs at the insanity of the world - it's not a sermon. Changing minds would have required an entirely different film, one that you could never expect from Adam McKay. So maybe what's really implied by the comments of those reviewers, is that there is a surprising lack of films about climate change - and hence when finally there is one, it has to be everything at once.
As the film says, NASA's Planetary Defense Coordination Office is a real thing, and I suppose they don't work alone (there is already a reference to ESA in the article I reference below). First, there are programs that constantly watch the sky to map object trajectories (comets, meteoroids, whatever else) and detect potentially dangerous ones. It would therefore be actually very unlikely that a grad student looking for other stuff would coincidentally be the one finding a 'planet killer'. Once that's detected, rockets would be fired to attempt to nudge the object off its current trajectory. In fact, as it happens, two months ago a rocket was launched that will connect with an asteroid in the fall to test this approach - see here.
So no, we wouldn't just panic and die. Or at least, not until the nudge fails.
There are now actually things in place to deal with such a comet.
As the film says, NASA's Planetary Defense Coordination Office is a real thing, and I suppose they don't work alone (there is already a reference to ESA in the article I reference below). First, there are programs that constantly watch the sky to map object trajectories (comets, meteoroids, whatever else) and detect potentially dangerous ones. It would therefore be actually very unlikely that a grad student looking for other stuff would coincidentally be the one finding a 'planet killer'. Once that's detected, rockets would be fired to attempt to nudge the object off its current trajectory. In fact, as it happens, two months ago a rocket was launched that will connect with an asteroid in the fall to test this approach - see here.
So no, we wouldn't just panic and die. Or at least, not until the nudge fails.
I know you didn't ask me, but one issue I had with The Big Short (which I thought was otherwise very good), is that the main characters come out on top, and that's not presented as a bad thing. I felt to me like the ending said 'good on them that they saw the issue and played the system to come out on top', which is very frustrating given how the movie otherwise demonstrates how problematic that system is, and that the sort of thing that made the main characters all that money is deeply wrong.
@Cheimoon
Isn't there a certain area in space where we struggle to observe asteroids?
I know they are looking at various options like you mentioned such as nudging it's trajectory and blowing it up but I find it hard to believe that we could do anything due to the sheer energy these things can carry. Also read that if they did blow it up it would just reform into a big ball of small meteors
This is an amazing video and around the 5 minute mark it explains what I mentioned in my first paragraph.
Isn't there a certain area in space where we struggle to observe asteroids?
I know they are looking at various options like you mentioned such as nudging it's trajectory and blowing it up but I find it hard to believe that we could do anything due to the sheer energy these things can carry. Also read that if they did blow it up it would just reform into a big ball of small meteors
This is an amazing video and around the 5 minute mark it explains what I mentioned in my first paragraph.
If we know about it long enough in advance, there's basically no size asteroid or comet we can't deal with. There are a lot of methods that come before "blow it up" in the manual of dealing with planet killers. That's one of the thing they got wrong in the film (or probably chose to get wrong). As you say, that close it would just turn into a bunch of little meteors, which would impart the exact same amount of energy on the Earth. It might have been better than one big motherfecker, but not by a lot.@Cheimoon
Isn't there a certain area in space where we struggle to observe asteroids?
I know they are looking at various options like you mentioned such as nudging it's trajectory and blowing it up but I find it hard to believe that we could do anything due to the sheer energy these things can carry. Also read that if they did blow it up it would just reform into a big ball of small meteors
This is an amazing video and around the 5 minute mark it explains what I mentioned in my first paragraph.
Some methods are quite funny. If we get it far enough out, we could paint one side of it. After all, space is really big, and Earth is really small. If you start early enough, a minuscule difference is going to build up enough to miss.
Last edited:
I won't claim to be an expert and youight be right that we have a blind spot. I don't remember that, but then that doesn't necessarily mean much.@Cheimoon
Isn't there a certain area in space where we struggle to observe asteroids?
I know they are looking at various options like you mentioned such as nudging it's trajectory and blowing it up but I find it hard to believe that we could do anything due to the sheer energy these things can carry. Also read that if they did blow it up it would just reform into a big ball of small meteors
This is an amazing video and around the 5 minute mark it explains what I mentioned in my first paragraph.
For the rest - yeah that's true about blowing it up. Although blowing it up in deep space would probably make the pieces go in all kinds of directions, not all towards us. Other than that, I think nudging is really the preferred strategy - plus everything @nimic said.
Interesting stuff thanks, I knew about the test.I just watched it now. I left a review in the movie thread (conclusion: strong first half, weaker second half, some distraction, so overall a bit uneven), but I am amazed how a lot of reviewers seem to think a movie like this could have really changed something, if only it would have been more subtle. If the climate change debate shows anything, it's that it is very difficult to change people's minds on the subject, and you really can't expect that from an allegorical satire. This film 'just' laughs at the insanity of the world - it's not a sermon. Changing minds would have required an entirely different film, one that you could never expect from Adam McKay. So maybe what's really implied by the comments of those reviewers, is that there is a surprising lack of films about climate change - and hence when finally there is one, it has to be everything at once.
There are now actually things in place to deal with such a comet.
As the film says, NASA's Planetary Defense Coordination Office is a real thing, and I suppose they don't work alone (there is already a reference to ESA in the article I reference below). First, there are programs that constantly watch the sky to map object trajectories (comets, meteoroids, whatever else) and detect potentially dangerous ones. It would therefore be actually very unlikely that a grad student looking for other stuff would coincidentally be the one finding a 'planet killer'. Once that's detected, rockets would be fired to attempt to nudge the object off its current trajectory. In fact, as it happens, two months ago a rocket was launched that will connect with an asteroid in the fall to test this approach - see here.
So no, we wouldn't just panic and die. Or at least, not until the nudge fails.
I know you didn't ask me, but one issue I had with The Big Short (which I thought was otherwise very good), is that the main characters come out on top, and that's not presented as a bad thing. I felt to me like the ending said 'good on them that they saw the issue and played the system to come out on top', which is very frustrating given how the movie otherwise demonstrates how problematic that system is, and that the sort of thing that made the main characters all that money is deeply wrong.
Still though in a scenario like this I just don't trust the human race to react rationally.
Was that at the end? I thought it ended more on a high for them, but maybe I'm just misremembering the ending.
Highly recommend Margin Call.
Tbh it's been a while since I've seen it as well, I'm not sure what part of the movie that scene is from.
Edit - Just did a quick google of the ending
It's pretty decent imo.
This.
Yep, saw it, great film.
The YouTube thread reminded me of why this movie seemed so familiar...
Yeah, that's the ending if I remember correctly. It's pretty grim, and Carrell character also make it clear that he didn't really enjoy making that money
It’s not really at the end. IIRC their final scene is where they visit the abandoned offices of Lehman Brothers.
Oscar nominee for best picture
what the feck?
what the feck?
More of a political vote than for being an actual good movie, which it wasn't at all.Good flick, but shouldn’t be in Oscar contention.
Yeah. I heard bad things and watched it for the first time on Sunday - it was decent actually. But not a lot more than that.
I thought it was great.
Are the Oscars trying to pull in younger viewers?
Hope it wins. Not the best film on the list but certainly the most important.
Yeah apparently
There is pressure to make the Oscars more popular with and relevant to young audiences, after 2021's pared-down ceremony tanked in the ratings, partly due to the absence of big film releases during lockdown (BBC)
I watched the first 30 minutes and hated it. I like the premise of a politcal satire movie (Four Lions, In the Loop are some of my favourite movies), they bring a balance between funny but also realistic and thought provoking. This tried to take things into too much of an extreme that it didn't become believable anymore and was just ridiculous.
The scene with the president just threw me off. I don't care how dumb a president is, no one will nonchalantly throw away a threat of an asteroid hitting the earth within 6 months ("99%? Oh so not a 100 percent"
). If they said 6 years and that was the reaction of the president, I wouldn't have been as mad. The TV interview scene afterwards was just as bad.It's a worse version of Idiocracy (decent movie), which atleast advertized itself as an extreme example of the future.
I guess we'll agree to disagree, because I find Idiocracy very overrated. As far as satire goes this is far better too.
Beat comedy in the last 10 years. I wish I was joking. Comedy has been dead for a long time in Hollywood. Love the movie though. It was well done how scary close it is to reality
It might have been funny or important if it came out 10 years ago. Now it’s just self-indulgent Hollywood tripe.
Anyone else here have a list of actors they just don’t like, irrespective of roles/films? I don’t have an active list somewhere, but I realized if I did, it would have Jonah Hill, Leonardo, J Law, and Meryl Streep in the top 25. The only actors missing off the top of my head would be Kevin Hart and Jim Belushi. I just despise these actors, and even though many here have said they enjoyed the message (script) I can’t bring myself to watch this.
It was bad. Just plain bad.
Rather than have a good plot with a subtle message, this is just preachy and not funny.
I thought it was great. In saying that. Tick Tick Boom should win maybe. Long as nightmare Alley doesn't win.
Di caprio in my opinion has exhausted his supply of roles. He has done too many films. I am not saying he is bad but its kind of boring watching him now.
I would say he makes enough films, I feel like Brad Pitt has been in far more stuff (including mediocre stuff) but maybe that's just my perception.