Just watched this

memes aside, the movie was objectively good and had literally nothing to do with feminism. If anything the opposite, it was about examining the universal feeling of alienation and self destructive behavior(like wasting your life posting on an anonymous image board)

The entire film is just a hack collection of already far better executed ideas, so better watch those films instead.
The setting and concept from Stalker/Solaris, the approach of The Descent, the doppelganger dillema from Enemy, the alien design from Under the Skin, the monsters designs from The Thing etc etc.

Attached: Under The Skin.mkv_snapshot_01.39.49_.jpg (1920x1038, 933K)

why satan? I watched the whole thing, and it was good enough to be 7/10, maybe 8/10, all the characters were somwhat fleshed out, the mistery surronding the area had a lovecraftian appeal and the visuals were alein enough to add on the eldritch thematic.

Disuss what...your bad taste ? It's a nice movie

Attached: 1493548745961.jpg (250x241, 7K)

Let me guess. You think it's a bone chilling slow burn.

lmao we got a discord tranny weeb here

Basically this. Also the film has some terrible exposition, it's like they wanted to make cerebral sci-fi but got scared and shot some terrible exposition scenes for literal brainlets. The film is too literal, everything is explained. Some of the scenes are very badly shot, like the crocodile scene it's just funny and cringeworthy. The slow motion as she shoots the crocodile was bad. There are many ridiculous moments like this. That's the result of bad direction/writing. The last portion in the lighthouse is nice but that doesn't save the mess that was the rest of the film.

I saw this movie completely in the dark never watching a trailer. got stupid stoned before it and almost had an anxiety attack from how loud the production was and the visuals. on that alone its a 7/10

I agree, it's forgettable trash, why bother making this thread?

Film was pretty good.

Had decent stalker-like vibe. The mimic at the end ruined my immersion though. It looked too much like the dancing metal alien meme.

So this is bad too? I had it lined up for watching tonight after the disappointment of "A Quiet Place". Sometimes I wish I was younger again and could uncritically enjoy some cool movie without grinding my teeth over glaring plot holes.

I still cannot wrap my mind around how the person who wrote this trash also wrote fucking Dredd. That movie is so fucking cool, and the amount of annoying bullshit is literally zero

Was Alex Garland just pretending to be retarded, or what happened bros?

Attached: 7CF8135A-4588-41CF-A8D1-5B6A9D1FC54F.jpg (214x317, 18K)

D
U
D
E

at least explain why its garbage

it's way better than a quiet place, lol. Like WAY better

It’s really good. OP is shitposting.

Well he wasn't the only one writing dredd and he also wasn't the director there. The only other movie he directed is Ex Machina which is also garbage.

oh shit, i thought u were serious about it...fucking zoomers

Here you go. Not a garbage but a mediocre film at best.

don't bother, user. they can't.

>everything is explained

Lmao

It is.

It ain’t

It was fine, nothing special but nothing to complain about either. At least it was a new idea

>Ex Machina which is also garbage.

user why do you analize it that way, isn't the whole is greater than the sum of its parts? I can tear apart a film going point by point saying A executed better this theme than B and C executed better the special effects than B, so B is worst than both.

I liked it. I thought it was haunting and poignant

It was a fun movie with novel visuals and very cool sound production. It had a range of horror/sci-fi/dramatic elements that kept things interesting. It was sometimes a little heavy on exposition what with the effective voiceover, and maybe a bit navel-gazey, but overall neat film

Also the Skelton-bear voice thief was fuckin dope

they only explain the basics and what they know, the prism is still alien as fuck

What was that ending, exactly?
To be honest if they had made this a modern Predator style movie with some action stars it would have been a LOT better, fite me

>had a lovecraftian appeal and the visuals were alein enough to add on the eldritch thematic.
I liked the movie, but this is a little over the top
Also the ending fell flat

FEMINISM REEEEEEEEE
Fucking grow up if that's the reason you don't like the movie you fedora tipping twat

It is.
I didn't overanalyze the film, when i watched it and the exposition was so extremely clunky then i was taken out of the film, there are lot of things wrong with the film besides that. Like i said it's a mess, only the ending is nice. I also thought the acting was bad especially the chick who claimed that on the video where the intestines were moving that it's only a light.

>To be honest if they had made this a modern Predator style movie with some action stars it would have been a LOT better, fite me
this would have been great, also more bear

Making something harder to understand =/=better

Oh you are talking about that. I was talking about how they hamfisted the backstory into the boat ride. The alien is not completely explained but to completely explain you would need some 20 page report, still almost everything is explained. In regards to character motivation, what they are doing, how are they doing it and even the alien is largely explained.

Treating your audience like idiots=good.

Strawman

Is it true the movie is actually about surviving cancer

Surviving? No

Clunky exposition? I genuinly don't know how you get that. The film is a mess? it has a coherent plotline, it fleshes out almost all the characters in the limited amount of time it has, the visuals are there to add. If you saying only the ending is nice, how did you get a satifying conclussion if the rest was awful, it should've been a mess too don't you think?

Mom, the movie didn't make me think and feel superior, IT'S SHIT IT'S FRIGGIN SHIT!!

Attached: l65.png (454x520, 13K)

Then is it about cancer

The soundtrack was good. You can't deny this.

>In regards to character motivation, what they are doing, how are they doing it and even the alien is largely explained
Why is this a bad thing? they need to explain something if not it would feel like random things are happening.

You're a fucking idiot. /thread

Not really.
The boat scene is exposition dump to quickly explain motivation of characters, most of the exposition was clunky. The plotiline is perfectly coherent, there are several individual moments within the plot that are stupid or not really believable or just funny because of the way they are presented. The digital visuals are okay at best. Not really something great. I didn't say it was awful, it was messy. I meant the part where Portman was dancing with the alien in the lighthouse not the actual ending.

Well, I guess it would've been more interesting to see the boat ride, right?

Not OP, but it is garbage for the regular channer. Too much feminism.

>there are several individual moments within the plot that are stupid or not really believable or just funny because of the way they are presented.
Give some examples please.

I'm surprised herschlag agreed to participate in this steaming pile of shit.

not him but right off the bat the cliche starting scene of sole survivor being isolated and questioned in captivity

That's not a bad thing either. Bad thing is how they chose to deal with the explanations. It's clunky and unnatural most of the time. It feels like the audience is spoonfed.
Why not?
The crocodile scene like i already said, the video of previous soldiers where one person claims that it's a light. That's just idiotic. The first bear attack scene.

You kidding right? You have to be a literal brainlet to think this...

user, I... I'm serious. I didn't think it was very good.

it could have been good if it was completely different

>That's not a bad thing either. Bad thing is how they chose to deal with the explanations. It's clunky and unnatural most of the time. It feels like the audience is spoonfed.
Im quite sure the film never explained something in such a way.

>Why not?
Cuz they don't want to waste time on something irrelevant.

>The crocodile scene like i already said, the video of previous soldiers where one person claims that it's a light. That's just idiotic. The first bear attack scene.
These are nitpicks user, and seem to be based on personal opinion.

Yet you replied with a meme answer

Attached: 1561251074575.png (696x797, 456K)

It did.
It wouldn't fit the style of the filmmaking but they could have done it, there are lot of films which do things like that.
Those aren't nitpicks, i mean those are some of the major setpieces and scenes that move the plot forward. If you don't believe them and if trained soldiers or whoever they were, behave like complete idiots then it's just not good.

It's a meme movie, what do you want from me, user!?

Actual film criticism

Hmmm, would you mind recommending me some better examples of similar movies, that are not solaris, since is the only one i can think of and is superior to this movie, maybe my references are rusty

Stalker, The Thing for the horror aspects.

>the movie was objectively good
>stating an absolute in an opinion
>Yea Forums people think this is logic

Attached: WOW BRAH.jpg (435x450, 17K)

hey there new guy, lemme give you a tour...

the end is bad and a huge deviation from the source material
also plot holes by lazyness/cuts/lack of explanation

Attached: ds.jpg (400x400, 57K)

>Implying this would impress anyone but manchilds
Garbage

somebody explain what was the point of blacked.com parts, i still dont get it

Attached: 1543359276759.gif (200x133, 970K)

to make (you), specifically, uncomfortable.

Superb opening sequence.

>weak meme reply

Attached: 1557852494358.jpg (381x631, 42K)

bad acting, bad writing, bad visuals

it made you reply so at least 5/10.

This movie is the quintessential 5/10 film

The book is amazing but truly unfilmable.

The movie tried but ultimately failed.

They should print this on the movie poster along with the little squibs from Peter Travers or whoever.

fell asleep after 30 minutes.

are movies not made to entertain any more?

the movie doesnt begin to get entertaining until the last 30 mins or so

It was a bone chilling slow burn. Get some real taste.

What the fuck was that ending?

Does the book explain the ending better, because the ending in the movie was pointless garbage.

loved the film. Nat did a great job leading the movie, and that one scene I wont spoil was fucking amazing in theaters. My whole chair shook.

>slow burn
more like slow fart, lmao

Attached: 1560372343012.jpg (700x955, 65K)

The author of the novel is even more garbage

>Hey, this is just H.P. Lovecraft’s The Color Out of Space
>Hurr no it’s not because I said so and I don’t even like Lovecraft

It had some cool visuals at least.

Attached: 1_Lqm-Kep9vTOTaOTMQ6dXYA[1].jpg (1024x615, 176K)

Nah it was shit. Most people here agree. Just a horrible movie with pretentious themes, horrible acting, writing and directing. The only scene that’s rather good is towards the end. The movie has two BLACKED scenes so it makes it even more trash for interracial push.

I'll give it that.

The amount of plebs absolutely fucking filtered by this film is amazing. Never fucking post here again.

It’s nothing like colour out of space though. You just heard someone say that and have just repeated it, haven’t you?

Are you fucking retarded? You obviously haven’t read it if you can’t see any similarities at all. Jesus Christ kill your self

Amazing? No. Interesting? Yes.

this. did you see it in theaters too?

Have you? There are hardly any similarities. Fucking list them or fuck off.

All the people that aren’t cucks get filtered by this movie? I agree.

Was Netflix only in the uk as far as I could tell. I read the sound design for cinema was great though. Damn shame.

>the exposition was so extremely clunky
No it wasn’t.
>there are lot of things wrong with the film besides that.
Such as?
>Like i said it's a mess
Why?
>the acting was bad
No it wasn’t. Your pseud tier criticism is cringe worthy and you’re a pleb. It’s based on a book and was a far better than average adaptation for difficult source material. Your insistent and pointless contrarianism doesn’t make you unique or special, only dumb.

The rumble of that one scene was incredible. I almost had to hold my ears like a little bitch cause they had it turned up so loud, but it added so much and made me instantly like the movie.

Just read my post after that.
>Your insistent and pointless contrarianism doesn’t make you unique or special, only dumb.
Yes having an opinion is a bad thing.

I’m pretty sure only gays and/or brainlets like this movie.

Oscar Issac should have been more prevalent desu

Your criticism is a waste of time to read because I can apply it to any movie. Now realize how idiotic and vague you sound when your criticism is applied to Citizen Kane by changing a few words.
>The film room scene is exposition dump to quickly explain motivation of characters, most of the exposition was clunky. The plotiline is perfectly coherent, there are several individual moments within the plot that are stupid or not really believable or just funny because of the way they are presented. The visuals are okay at best. Not really something great. I didn't say it was awful, it was messy. I meant the part where Welles dropped the snow globe, not the actual ending.

get em!

>It did.
I understand clunky exposition as on the nose, exposition that comes out of nowhere, counter intuitive. I never saw that on the movie.

>It wouldn't fit the style of the filmmaking but they could have done it, there are lot of films which do things like that.
Here you are just agrreeing with me.

>Those aren't nitpicks, i mean those are some of the major setpieces and scenes that move the plot forward. If you don't believe them and if trained soldiers or whoever they were, behave like complete idiots then it's just not good
Those are nitpicks, kid.

it's obviously cancer

why cant people just like a movie for what it is rather than who it stars or what colour they are? this is just like the mermaid shit thats coming out.

The books were pretty good. They changed the story to force useless filler in the adaptation.

I said what's bad about that exposition scene and it's clunky and lazy. The boat scene is there only so they can dump the motivation of every character to audience, it's not done in an organic way it's just to get it out the way. The moments which are funny, unbelievable and stupid i named later on. Yes the digital visuals are not that great, the whole film attempts to have this otherwordly visuals but it's successful in some places and in others not. The acting is completely wooden it's like Garland told them they are making a nice piece of ikea furniture instead of an actual film.

I did.
Those are 3 major scenes in the film. Nitpicking would be talking about completely irrelevant details. These are major things, kid.

Then how to deliver exposition in a movie like this? Also, the exposition was delivered bit by bit, it wasn't all an info dump as you are making it seem.

Attached: 1561569723388.jpg (900x900, 60K)

for once I agree with OP

>it's garbage
You're a brainlet. Discuss.

It did what it was sent out to do. It was fun and I enjoyed it. Why cant you have fun?

>tv/liked it when it came out and couldn't shut up about it, threads everywhere
>now Yea Forums hates it and says it's without a doubt at all utter trash and has nothing redeeming

I guess it just needed time to sink in?

The boat scene was an exposition dump so that's just one scene where they explained one or more characters i don't remember right now.

>Make an objective shit movie with bad sound design, bad cinematography and bad acting
>Put in some 12 year old philosophy and never explain the bizarre shit you put in it
>Retards put down all criticism of the film by saying "it's too deep for your"

Rinse and fucking repeat.

Attached: 583a6095f27ba9cd9f75c5b11756f74e2a6c7d0481ab6dc2ed2cdb3343167240.png (791x490, 299K)

But they are kid, you are focusing on how the crocodile scene was shot and how did trained soldiers respond to strange events, instead of saying, this scene is irrelevant because it's never brought up again and could be easily removed. Events that move the plot forward are good elements in a film are consistent writing, and it's better if those events are belivable.

I had fun and sex.

> book ending
area x expands indefinitely
>biologist/entity contact
things are more complicated
biologist's clone (the original one has been mutated in a marine leviathan) meets "first-contact" human (also mutated) and gets briefed by touching it

i saw it with my sister and my girlfriend, and got laid the same night.

A couple of retards saying is shit doesn't count as an 180 on the entire thread

He doesn't actually know why it's trash, so he wants Yea Forums to list it out for him so he can parrot their opinions in the future without needing to think for himself.

It's one of the best films in 20 years. There's a reason why you don't back up your claim: you're just upset for a personal reason and can't think rationally.

Annihilation is excellent and there's nothing you can do about it.

Fight me, faggot.

>The film is too literal, everything is explained.
If you think that is a 'fault' within a film you have brain damage

No. We talked about this last year. It's your own fault for missing it when every non-retard was watching it. Make a thread about something recent or don't make threads. Period. End of discussion. Replying to my post indicates you're reddit.

>retard formatting
Opinion invalidated.

This. Movies that trigger delicate incel egos tend to generate a negative reaction.

Fucking pathetic faggots.

>no
>no it wasn't
>not uh
Yeah, your arguments are surely much better than his

I only liked it because it got good reviews nd everyone on YT said it was amazing and smart sci-fi so I thought I was being cool by liking it.
Now I don't like it because Yea Forums has heel turned on it and I don't want to have to defend a film when the majority of the board says it's bad.

Hope you enjoyed the blog. Like and Subscribe.

pleb

There are many things which don't really come to play later, like when they fall asleep for several days at the beginning. I didn't believe in the characters because of how they behaved, crocodile scene added to that. I did not believe that they are intelligent in any way whatsoever. I didn't give a shit about them. That's what those and other scenes caused. The film doesn't have enough visual strength to overcome that.
>Events that move the plot forward are good elements in a film
Then some films must be staying in one place.
Paramount sold the film Netflix because it was too vague and too intelligent for the majority of audiences. So i expected cerebral sci-fi. It's not that.

>A couple

>can't explain why you liked it
>THERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT LOL
Great post dude, really convincing.

>Even if the entire cast and crew was entirely male the film would still be hack garbage.
True, however, making it all female made the movie twice worse.

i didn't get it i stopped watching after i saw my third sex scene

Every time I see one of these threads I strongly want to make a video essay about how bad Annihilation is. But I don't want to watch it again.

I liked some of the visuals but that romance was such bullshit. The ending sucked as well. Typical overdrawn a24 garbage that cares more about some political agenda bullet points than actual content because the critics do so as well. Fuck this gay earth

agree. Don't really think it was that feminist, just boring, badly acted, and pointless.

The things you said could be applied to any film, even those considered GOATs

FACT: finding a movie to be bad is one thing, but being actively angry at that fact is quite another thing: it shows emotional investment, and considering the population here, you can be sure it has to do with one of their many mental problems; take your pick:

>cast is mostly woman
>there's a sex scene with a black man
>it isn't spoonfed

Sexists, racists, brainlets, all get triggered endlessly by this kino.

Remember, incels: if you get upset, it's because you got triggered. And don't try saying it's because bad movies upset you, we all know that ain't true.

Because everything has to have an agenda and people have to see an agenda in everything.

I know you're probably memeing but this is most Yea Forums users in a fucking nutshell

Have sex

I can, faggot. You're the one who started this shit and who didn't think it'd mean anything to back that ass up.

>great direction
>awesome design (that mural death, that bear, that shimmer)
>dat legendary final scene
>dat design
>dat plot

It was awesome. The fact that it's all about self-destruction and virtually none of you sees it is beautiful. Every character has a self-destructive back story (the BLACKED scene is about that, too, but you're too fucking dumb and insecure to see beyond skin colour), self-harm, cancer, etc. The space entity is literally space cancer and destroys by imitation, and gets destroyed in the process.

You don't get more kino than this. Stay mad, incels!

Autism. Nothing ever makes sense to you morons. Seriously, why do you even try fiction? Stick to documentaries. Fiction is for functional adults who understand emotions and that there are many points of view. You're not evolved enough for this, you're a living calculator, stick to what you can do.

Getting emotionally invested in a movie is also what makes one engaging, memorable, and edge of your seat exciting when you are first watching it. There isn't anything wrong with showing emotional investment, but when that investment is only in regards to how poor a product was, there is a problem with the film.

Direction and plot completely fail when the acting and dialogue is poor.

>stuff you can say about any movie
>stuff you easily say about a film you haven't even watched
Great post dude, really convincing

What I really like about this film is that it reanalyzes the concept of the slasher film. It's a pastiche of Predator (1987) of course and that's where his greatest strength lies.

Predator 87 is the action hero of the 80s against an invisible evil. Annhilation is about the human being against an indifferent nature that makes way for life through chaos (I don't use the word entropy because I understand it's a more complex concept than raw chaos) and how, from the human point of view, the natural order doesn't have to be the best possible direction to take (literally, nature is going to terraform the planet). In addition the characters are soldiers but also something else, they are like scientific warriors, it is a very interesting concept in itself.

It also makes an analysis of what motivates a soldier. It asks questions that I also have. Do soldiers incline to war because they seek its extinction subconsciously? Of course if I ask such a question to a born warrior, he would probably punch me in the face, but it is intriguing that it leads to death in combat. Every character in Annhilation has its past and crystallizes in its interaction with this new hallucinogenic biosphere, erasing memories, the perception of time, altering DNA.

I think it's a great film, I don't like the subplot of the main character and her betrayal of her husband, but I understand that it's part of the psychological development of the hero.

>actually taking the bait

>great direction
Not really
>awesome design (that mural death, that bear, that shimmer)
Some of it yes.
>dat legendary final scene
Weird definition of legendary.
>dat design
Some of it yes.
>dat plot
Partially.

>It was awesome. The fact that it's all about self-destruction and virtually none of you sees it is beautiful. Every character has a self-destructive back story (the BLACKED scene is about that, too, but you're too fucking dumb and insecure to see beyond skin colour), self-harm, cancer, etc. The space entity is literally space cancer and destroys by imitation, and gets destroyed in the process.
If you think you are somehow clever by getting the main theme of the film then sorry to break it to you, you are not.

>he's merely pretending user
uh-huh

I think you're reaching with your analysis of the psychology of a soldier.

It doesnt delve in to that at all really.

The film is way less deep than you give it credit for. Its more about how experience change you as a person to a point where you're unrecognisable. All of the characters are representations of that. Some of them literally, some of them metaphorically with their messed up backstorys.

Either way, its a pretty boring idea to explore. I liked the science fiction elements of the plot (even if they are all just borrowed from the book) better than the conveyed themes in the film.

>You don't like this movie because you're blinded by your prejudices!
Let's just re-arrange a few of those letters and wow look at this
>¡ only like this movie because I'm fully indoctrinated by the left,

DUDE SELF DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOR LMAO

Natalie portman is a scientist researching cell destruction. her husband is a soldier who went on a self destructive suicide mission in to the shimmer which mutates everything it touches. he did this because natalie portman self destructed their relationship by cheating on him even though she actually loves him according to her. He doesn't seem himself but also all the cells in his body are destroying themselves. So she decides to go into the shimmer herself in another act of potential self destruction because shes feels guilty. she joins an avengers team of self destructive women, a drug addict, a self harmer, a woman whos lost her entire family and has no will to live. The team leaders body is self destructing because of cancer, she joins the team because she knows shes going to die anyway. Shes reveals shes been choosing people to investigate the shimmer who specifically exhibit self destructive behaviour too (i wonder why the missions keep failing?). Then in the finale we see natalie portman work through all her internal struggle by fighting a copy of herself that imitates her every move. She stops fighting with herself and and just walks away, safely returning to the real world. But now shes got an ouroboros tattoo, an image of a snake eating itself which appears numerous times through the film on other people, and she doesn't seems quite herself either.
Did you get it you guys? did you understand the theme of the movie?

Attached: 1539443354470.jpg (960x640, 264K)

>There are many things which don't really come to play later, like when they fall asleep for several days at the beginning.
So...an scene which has the purpose to establish that the place has some weird effects on the mind should be brought up again? Why? It's redundant.

>I didn't believe in the characters because of how they behaved, crocodile scene added to that. I did not believe that they are intelligent in any way whatsoever. I didn't give a shit about them. That's what those and other scenes caused.
As if that scenario was common to know how to deal with, and as you could handle it better. user, your nitpick is howing and opinions are not actual criticism

>The film doesn't have enough visual strength to overcome that.
This is only a superficial aspect

>Then some films must be staying in one place.
I can't believe you actually believing this.

>actually taking the bait twice

>merely pretending to be merely pretending bro
uh-huh

I love this kind of stupid shit

I'm not saying it should, but it could have.
They were trained. It's a criticism and they are not nitpicks.
Visuals are not superificial, if they were better other aspects of the film wouldn't bother me so much or the film would be more bearable.
>Events that move the plot forward are good elements in a film
You said this. If only good elements move the plot forward then some of the films are stationary.

>I am le ebin troll, I troll you.
Uh-huh

absolute shit film like "us"
2/10 good visuals

Attached: reviewbra.png (1089x614, 691K)

Watch this: youtube.com/watch?v=URo66iLNEZw

this film is a masterpiece. i wouldn’t expect 20year olds on Yea Forums to get it

...

Something about how her guilt over having the affair while her husband was dying motivated her to go on the suicide mission
I didnt care about her character at all so either way it was just another random scene that made no impact and felt clunky and lame

>Like most book adaptions, it was inferior to the source material
>Cut out the "tower", arguably the best/scariest thing in the book
>cut out the giant moaning swamp creature (although the bear was pretty fucking scary)
>cut out the thousands of journals revealing how many expeditions really came before them
>added a cheating subplot for little reason instead of just giving us the flashbacks of the biologist from the books
>replaced the lighthouse keeper fractal alien for a fractal blob (still pretty cool though)
i thought the movie did a good job but in the end the coolest shit was cut out.

>I'm not saying it should, but it could have.
if it shouldnt then it's unnecesary

>They were trained. It's a criticism and they are not nitpicks.
Trained soldiers die irl and are not trained to fight eldritch crocs, also in the end they managed to take down the croc, so your point is still a nitpick

>Visuals are not superificial, if they were better other aspects of the film wouldn't bother me so much or the film would be more bearable.
Yes, they are, visuals are there to enhance the story.

>You said this. If only good elements move the plot forward then some of the films are stationary.
You are misinterpreting what i said

This is the reason I have the blu-ray. None of the characters are compelling but the set and monster design are more interesting than any movies I've seen since.

the only movie that got the feel of lovecraft right

I jerked off to Portman's lewd back while she was gyrating on the negro!

Attached: wheee.png (1024x728, 86K)

i doubt you could do anything better.

its easy to criticize ; if you can do better go for it.