Deja Vu
- Thread starter Brandon Rice
- Start date
yah -
and basically primetime TV is PG if not PG13, or you couldn't have the Shield, or a bunch of cop shows and stuff.
just look at Pirates of the Carribean, esp the last one -- well DON'T look at it if you can keep from it, but if you already have seen the last one, or have that thing where you can't look away from a train wreck, then it's a good example.
The Ring (american version) was PG-13 for being "scary" as there was little or no violence - just showing up and finding someone who's face looked like it had been through a taffy puller or watchin a lady comb her "scary" hair.
I do however think that sometimes the Big Big Budget VIP's get the benefit of the doubt when something is questionable or on the edge and go ahead and recieve a PG.
and basically primetime TV is PG if not PG13, or you couldn't have the Shield, or a bunch of cop shows and stuff.
just look at Pirates of the Carribean, esp the last one -- well DON'T look at it if you can keep from it, but if you already have seen the last one, or have that thing where you can't look away from a train wreck, then it's a good example.
The Ring (american version) was PG-13 for being "scary" as there was little or no violence - just showing up and finding someone who's face looked like it had been through a taffy puller or watchin a lady comb her "scary" hair.
I do however think that sometimes the Big Big Budget VIP's get the benefit of the doubt when something is questionable or on the edge and go ahead and recieve a PG.
The problem with this movie (and every time travel story has one, but not usually this blatant) . . .
There was no clear point at which the history should have changed.
In fact, the girl should never have washed up on shore to begin with.
In the original timeline, where she was dead, Denzel saw all the changes he had made -- in her apartment, the blown-up house and ambulance, etc..
But the problems were that 1) if all that had happened the first time around, as they must have, then he SAVED the girl from having her fingers cut off and ending up dead . . .
and 2) the outcome of it all should then have been the same, but there was no indication as to what he did differently "this" time around or why.
Major, major holes.
There was no clear point at which the history should have changed.
In fact, the girl should never have washed up on shore to begin with.
In the original timeline, where she was dead, Denzel saw all the changes he had made -- in her apartment, the blown-up house and ambulance, etc..
But the problems were that 1) if all that had happened the first time around, as they must have, then he SAVED the girl from having her fingers cut off and ending up dead . . .
and 2) the outcome of it all should then have been the same, but there was no indication as to what he did differently "this" time around or why.
Major, major holes.
CeSu Pro
Active member
I agree that the time travel wasn't handled as well as it could have been. Once i saw Denzel walking towards the girl at the end, all in slo-mo and sunglassed up, i was instantly dissapointed with the movie. they had a good thing going, and went too 'hollywood' at the end (for lack of better terms).
on a side: for those that like time travel movies, check out "Primer" if you haven't already, neat little (somewhat) indie flick about some guys that inadvertantly make a time machine. very entertaining and well done.
on a side: for those that like time travel movies, check out "Primer" if you haven't already, neat little (somewhat) indie flick about some guys that inadvertantly make a time machine. very entertaining and well done.
kimko
Veteran
woowoo! well who gives a sh it about time travel and how to make sense of it. you try making a time travel story make sense......you can't! unless you were there...once.....are you with me or are you over there.......... JACK DANIEL STANLEY was there! yeah so kool Jack to see this film with you as the star we got this tonite, and i was telling my girlfriend that you were in it. that's why we got it! so there! but Denzel was good too. i really like the bad guy(good acting) but you were awesome!!!!!! man you were in a scene with the D-man. good work.
Knoxworth
Well-known member
When they explained the technology of the satellite I couldnt help but laugh my ass off. i sincerely thought they were going to claim that they could go through buildings with some rendering satellite image crap.
Luckily friends were there to force me to watch it a little further.
Luckily friends were there to force me to watch it a little further.
ugafan
Looking for a woman
i couldn't get past how absurd it was and stopped watching. i never saw the second half of the movie, maybe it got better.
spidey
Shogun Assassin
lol lok there are clear things about time travel and possiblity I went to a class about time travel (talk about a cool college course) Just something were very unclear on how that this time travel ability was pausable. back to the future got alot more truth in time travel than any.
Doesn't have anything to do with the physics of it. Has everything to do with the logic of the storytelling.
spidey
Shogun Assassin
exactly they did a time travel film with give some facts of how it works. and for that it makes the story telling more far fetched.
as for the time travel class its principles it follow were very good and could work but would be ipossible becuase nothing can go the speed of light and you would have to use a worm hole which is why donnie darko works becuase it plays on the speed plus worm hole theory. the only thing is the thing going through the worm hole would have to gover over the speed of light to survive so its unlikely time travel would be possible... but its very interesting.
as for the time travel class its principles it follow were very good and could work but would be ipossible becuase nothing can go the speed of light and you would have to use a worm hole which is why donnie darko works becuase it plays on the speed plus worm hole theory. the only thing is the thing going through the worm hole would have to gover over the speed of light to survive so its unlikely time travel would be possible... but its very interesting.
Yeah, I did a physics independent study in college on the nature of time, and possible theories of time travel were part of it.
I'm not concerned with how it's done -- as a storytelling matter, it's really immaterial most of the time.
What I'm concerned with is the logic of the story, and it falls flat. There has to be a definitive moment when history changes, and the way they presented the story, there wasn't one.
I'm not concerned with how it's done -- as a storytelling matter, it's really immaterial most of the time.
What I'm concerned with is the logic of the story, and it falls flat. There has to be a definitive moment when history changes, and the way they presented the story, there wasn't one.
Matt Sconce
Veteran
I liked this a lot. I wish the baddy was more motivated and had more of a reason, but i liked the rest! Go JDS!
spidey
Shogun Assassin
i know david thats what im say the lgoic of the story wrapped around the science didnt make since. it made it forced inromation that was really important or nessescary. i like tony scott but this script was nothing in it that was proof or entertain like other time travel films present the theories. this you're just suppose to hop on and enjoy but i think t\they should make you feel like you learned something lol.
Blaine
Mr. Hollywood
This was a fairly entertaining movie until you started to look at the "logic" behind the time travel Scott and Denzel have both done better movies. I was able to enjoy the movie at a low level but it wouldn't be worth a second watch because it just had a plot hole that you could sail an aircraft carrier through.
The less explanation offered for science-fiction movie technology (FTL travel, time travel, matter-transporters, whatever) the better.
If a story's set on the Titanic, I don't need a lesson in how the ship's boilers work. Just tell the story; I'll happily stipulate that the technology works however it needs to work, in order to keep the ship moving toward that iceberg.
A frequent and irritating trap the writers kept falling into on 'Star Trek' scripts, was the constant reference to TECH this, and TECH that, to sew up loose narrative ends that they were too lazy or inept to resolve through competent storytelling.
If your story hangs on some chunk of made-up technology rather than characters, in order to function, you've got problems. Although the $$$ advanced you by the studio, for having written that story, probably goes a long way toward making you feel better, about it.
If a story's set on the Titanic, I don't need a lesson in how the ship's boilers work. Just tell the story; I'll happily stipulate that the technology works however it needs to work, in order to keep the ship moving toward that iceberg.
A frequent and irritating trap the writers kept falling into on 'Star Trek' scripts, was the constant reference to TECH this, and TECH that, to sew up loose narrative ends that they were too lazy or inept to resolve through competent storytelling.
If your story hangs on some chunk of made-up technology rather than characters, in order to function, you've got problems. Although the $$$ advanced you by the studio, for having written that story, probably goes a long way toward making you feel better, about it.