• diprount_tomato@lemmy.world
      305·
      11 months ago

      I didn’t. Barbie was a nice time watching a movie that didn’t even seem to take itself seriously so it allows surreal and fun moments.

      But Oppenheimer was just a masterpiece

      • Margot Robbie@lemmy.world
        26·
        11 months ago

        Pssh. Everyone knows that the lead actress whats-her-name takes herself super seriously and would never, ever, say or do anything just because it’s funny.

        • PRUSSIA_x86@lemmy.world
          17·
          11 months ago

          Is that academy award winning actress Margot Robbie, star of the silver screen sensation Barbie?

          • Margot Robbie@lemmy.world
            21·
            11 months ago

            Nominated. Would have been winning* if they let me name the movie “It’s Hardin’ Time” instead of “I, Tonya” then have Jared Leto rip me off.

            True genius is never appreciated until it is too late.

      • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
        38·
        11 months ago

        I strongly disagree. Both were middling and forgettable. In a year or so most people will struggle to recall anything about either movie.

        • Something_Complex@lemmy.world
          218·
          11 months ago

          cuz maybe you are not smart enough to understand Oppenheimer.

          But I guess some people are just simple.

          Here I’ll translate, bomb go bombom humanity goes die die. Unstoppable process , no stop.

          Simple?

          • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
            5·
            11 months ago

            it’s not about that at all.

            my criticisms in brief:

            • creating a post-post-modern work but centering the drama around the pre-modern harmartia in a character
            • the absolute break neck speed of narrative in an incredibly long work, without intermission is very draining and not enjoyable
            • the absence of charisma from the lead character coupled with the inexplicable attraction and support of everyone around him to him
            • “who’s story was it?” there were so many conflicting POVs, and about half a dozen endings
            • the surrealism wasn’t earned or justified
            • the entire thing is about the possible human cost of such decisions but the only victim we see is imaginary
            • most of the dialog is essentially exposition of scientific or legal terms
            • although what happens - post hoc - was interesting. the actual experience of watching it unfold was just watching a bunch of people bicker about their jobs
            • Something_Complex@lemmy.world
              17·
              11 months ago

              XD well I’ll make it simpler, we are all dead men walking. In a society without patience I understand what you mean.

              But 3 hours to build up to one sentence is something that I’ve never seen benfore in any other movie.

              Considering the sentence, well nah this movie was something else.

              You can expres you complaints however you want. But I never saw it as boring at any point…

          • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
            21·
            11 months ago

            Honestly man, have you never heard of atom bombs and nuclear power before that movie? You make it sound like this movie is enlightening humanity about the dangers of nuclear weapons and revealing some kind of secrets that haven’t been common knowledge for decades.

            Or to use your degrading language that you seem to like to make us dumb dumbs understand: small thing goes boing, that bad, we deady-dead, just as granny said.

    • bighatchester@lemmy.world
      143·
      11 months ago

      I feel like me and my gf are the only people that had zero interest in Oppenheimer . Just didn’t appeal to me at all , barbie was great though !

    • Ibaudia@lemmy.worldEnglish
      95·
      11 months ago

      I loved Oppenheimer because I love biopics. Didn’t bother with Barbie because it seemed not my style.

      • 0ops@lemm.ee
        23·
        11 months ago

        For what it’s worth, Barbie was way weirder than I thought it was going to be. Worth a watch imo

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        20·
        11 months ago

        Didn’t bother with Barbie because it seemed not my style.

        What I assumed the movie would be about being a Barbie movie isn’t my style either. However, the Barbie movie was quite a bit more than I expected. I rather liked the subtle feminist messaging underneath the obvious message. The movie also didn’t take itself too seriously on what could be considered very delicate topics. I’d recommend it even for non-typical Barbie doll audience.

    • Pelicanen@midwest.social
      151·
      11 months ago

      I’m hoping that he’s just making a joke about social ineptitude rather than making sexist claims.

    • SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zipEnglish
      8·
      11 months ago

      That’s what is unfortunate about some of these jokes. I find them funny, but most of the times it turns out that the intention was incel-ish. Reddit’s subreddit, DankMemes, is a prime example of this, you think you just saw a harmless sex based joke and then you jump into the comments and you find out the truth.

    • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
      22·
      11 months ago

      I would say a joke about how hard it can be for people to get a girlfriend immediately setting of incel alarms for you is being overly sensitive. It’s a very relatable and common experience for a lot of young men, so it is ripe for comedy. I guess struggling to get a girlfriend can technically make you involuntarily celibate, but I don’t think that was what you meant.

        • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
          11·
          11 months ago

          All men struggling to find a girlfriend are hateful misogynists? No, so it doesn’t help to immediately brand them as such.

      • Vub@lemmy.world
        11·
        11 months ago

        “Hard for people to get a girlfriend”. People? GET a girlfriend?

        The thing is that ALL HUMANS have a hard time finding someone meaningful for them. But only with the misogynistic and immature viewpoint of some men does it become this toxic and dangerous. Blaming some outer system instead of getting a grip of themselves and stop acting like whiny assholes.

        • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
          12·
          11 months ago

          If you think ‘get a girlfriend’ is some deeply misogynistic language indicative of how terrible the patriarchy is, you need to get some perspective.

          This was a throwaway joke about struggling to find a girlfriend. There is nothing toxic or dangerous going on here. They’re not blaming an outer system. Lots of men do genuinely have problems getting the confidence and self esteem to approach women, calling them whiny assholes is not very helpful.

          Tirade against incels elsewhere.

  • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
    32·
    11 months ago

    It’s actually much harder to watch Oppenheimer, because you have to see him say his famous catchphrase in a scene that could show John Green how to make sex more awkward

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        9·
        11 months ago

        He says, as Tatlock remounts him with the book in hand. “It’s ancient sumerian, and translates to… It’s Oppen-time-r”

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        12·
        11 months ago

        Oh yeah. It’s an absolute fucking insult to the man. He didn’t actually feel any of the gravity of the situation when he remarked “now I am become death, destroyer of worlds,” he wasn’t making a reference to a religious text, he just remembered that cool time he had sex and his lover dismounted, walked over to the bookcase, pulled a random book off the shelf, and asked “what does this means?” before getting back on

        • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.eeEnglish
          5·
          11 months ago

          The sexist remark about Barbie is the set up for the self deprecating joke. It’s not said seriously, it’s there to make you feel a little bit offended and engaged to then realise that they are making fun of themselves.

      • Fedizen@lemmy.world
        11·
        11 months ago

        I’ve heard almost this exact thing said unironically to no laughs where people believe they’re too smart to have girlfriend so it just strikes me as either a tone deaf joke or a cringe real thought so it doesn’t land.

  • thefloweracidic@lemmy.world
    273·
    11 months ago

    Why the fuck is there a debate? Why do we care? Just watch the movies you like and don’t fucking gate keep maybe?

    • SargTeaPot@lemmy.nz
      416·
      11 months ago

      Maybe we aren’t gatekeeping, maybe this debate is us discussing the movies. Don’t like it scroll on.

  • Da_Boom@iusearchlinux.fyiEnglish
    221·
    11 months ago

    Why do you need a girl to go with for Barbie? If you want to watch it, just fucking watch it. Who cares what people think.

  • MyFairJulia@lemmy.world
    202·
    11 months ago

    My gf and me watched both Oppenheimer and Barbie a few weeks before we got together. I loved both movies equally and my gf definitely preferred Oppenheimer.

    • VinnieFarsheds@lemmy.world
      174·
      11 months ago

      Skill issue. Just reading the Wikipedia article on the Manhattan Project would have given you most of the knowledge you need. I watched Oppenheimer and Barbie and liked both for different reasons.

    • Something_Complex@lemmy.world
      1051·
      11 months ago

      Wow, one has one of the most important and impressive complex storyline ever.

      The other one slightly defies gender roles and they rush the end…

      Shit I liked them both, but if you don’t like Oppenheimer it might be BC your IQ sits under the requirements man.

      Edit: I’m sorry for you guys :(, the world must be so simple too you I kinda admire it

      • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
        263·
        11 months ago

        Like most Nolan films, it is pseudo-intellectual tripe that allows people to think they’re smart because they can follow the plot of a simple Hollywood blockbuster produced for the lowest common denominator. Its cinematography is like they’re making a tiktok to hold your atrophied attention span.

        The fact that you refer to the plot as ‘the most important and impressive complex storyline ever’ portrays your age, how little film you watch, and probably why we shouldn’t believe your take on either Barbie, Oppenheimer, or anything else.

        • Something_Complex@lemmy.world
          217·
          11 months ago

          Hey you are absolutely right, if we die because of climate change instead of nuclear war.

          But I bet if the last thing you see is a bright flash it sudently becomes a lot more important

          • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
            12·
            11 months ago

            No, because Oppenheimer was not an instructional video on nuclear drills. Not that there are any; if nukes successfully hit, it’s the lottery if you survive healthy enough to continue humanity. I’m not sure how Oppenheimer is meant to change that fact. Good job reading my comment with zero comprehension I guess.

      • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.eeEnglish
        161·
        11 months ago

        “To be fair, you need a pretty high IQ to watch rick and morty”

        If you think opp was intellectual you’re the self-important mediocre schlub it was meant to impress

      • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
        122·
        11 months ago

        An important and complex storyline can still be executed awfully either in writing or cinematography. But you gotta have at least a somewhat under the average IQ to understand that.

        • Something_Complex@lemmy.world
          117·
          11 months ago

          Well I’ve whatched it’s really good. If you don’t understand people like west Anderson and directors in the same category I really wonder if you think this movie was bad

          • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
            15·
            11 months ago

            It’s not about the movie(s) in question, it is a general statement. Saying a movie is automatically good because the underlying story is good or worth telling is denouncing so many factors that play into making a movie a good movie. PatFussy was only pointing out that the cutting was terrible (I haven’t seen the movie itself so I cannot judge it) and too fast paced. This is something that can absolutely ruin an otherwise great movie and make it unbearable to watch. The story, the script, the dialogue, the acting, the effects, the cutting, the lighting, the sound and soundtrack- all these things (and many more) are individually important and only when everything works well together a movie can be good (doesn’t automatically mean it is a good movie). Is Oppenheimer a story worth being told? Probably. Most stories are. Has it been told in a well executed way? I don’t know, and also this is a highly personal matter of taste. If someone thinks the cutting is epileptic then that’s a valid opinion that has nothing to do with their intelligence, not understanding a movie, or having an unsophisticated taste in cinema.

            As a side note, putting “West” Anderson in a category with Christopher Nolan is ridiculous. One makes arty, more indie movies with rather obscure storylines that rely heavily on the script and dialogue, while the other makes grand style blockbuster action movies. Except for both of them being famous and making movies, the difference could not be vaster.