Rebel Moon Part 1: Child Of Fire

[Threash]

How can you fuck up "Seven Samurai in space" so bad? I tell you how, you skip the whole "defending the town" bit.

[Raguel]

Hah I remember when I thought to myself "it's impossible to mess up hot chicks and samurai robots."  Snyder has a true talent. 

[Threash]

Hah I remember when I thought to myself "it's impossible to mess up hot chicks and samurai robots."  Snyder has a true talent. 

Samurai robot was on screen for like 2 minutes.

[Velorath]

How can you fuck up "Seven Samurai in space" so bad?

That's how I felt after watching Rogue One.

[Surlyboi]

This flick wishes it was Rogue One.

[Threash]

Rogue One was fucking great, easily top three Star Wars movie.

[Velorath]

If Rogue One wasn't a Star Wars movie nobody would talk about it. Boring characters and a mess of a story.

[Tale]

I was constantly asking why in this movie. Why does the big bad need to be an evil senator. There's no need to mimic Palpatine that closely. Why does there need to be a b-grade twi'lek in your bar? You seem to have no trouble thinking up other cool original monsters.

Then I fell asleep.

Rogue One is a great movie.

[Riggswolfe]

Rogue One was fucking great, easily top three Star Wars movie.

Rogue One is half of a really good Star Wars movie. The first half isn't very good at all. Jyn is a boring character who is just sleepwalking through the movie and it's more or less a series of boring fetch quests. Then her dad dies and she is angry at the Rebellion followed in the next scene by her trying to rally the Rebellion to help them win a victory.

Once they get to Scariff though she seems to wake up as a character and actually takes an active role in the remaining story. The battle scenes are great and we actually get to see the characters do cool stuff before they die. I'd have cared more about their deaths if the first half of the movie had them actually develop as characters but the second half did a great job of stirring a bit of emotion regardless.

I often wonder if two different writers worked on each half of Rogue One and then they just sort of stapled the two halves together. It's probably the best Star Wars movie in the Disney era but that's faint praise.

I was constantly asking why in this movie. Why does the big bad need to be an evil senator. There's no need to mimic Palpatine that closely. Why does there need to be a b-grade twi'lek in your bar? You seem to have no trouble thinking up other cool original monsters.

Then I fell asleep.

Rogue One is a great movie.

Didn't it start as a pitch for a Star Wars movie? Sounds to me like they just filed the serial numbers off in the most lazy way possible. I haven't seen it yet and might not as the reviews are awful but that's what I figure happened.

[HaemishM]

Rogue One had some significant studio interference post-production, as well as a lot of reshoots, which is one of the reasons it was so expensive. No telling what was on the cutting room floor, but having watched and loved Andor, I'm leaning towards the studio fucking up parts of that movie.

And yes, Rebel Moon was supposedly a pitch Snyder made to Lucas for a Star Wars movie.

[Tale]

Didn't it start as a pitch for a Star Wars movie? Sounds to me like they just filed the serial numbers off in the most lazy way possible. I haven't seen it yet and might not as the reviews are awful but that's what I figure happened.

And yes, Rebel Moon was supposedly a pitch Snyder made to Lucas for a Star Wars movie.

I understood that, but still asked why because Darth Vader is changed to a version of Standartenführer Hans Landa (Inglorious Basterds villain), the Empire is changed to the Motherworld which has kind of a fantasy fiction backstory, Tatooine is changed to have fertile soil and a spring sex festival...

But the Palpatine is a senator who takes control (why even have a senate in this story?), there are Twi'leks where the only difference is that the head appendages go up like horns not down like lekku, and despite being in a world of intricately-designed monsters, the mounts are horses with face masks, with close-ups of undisguised horse flanks.

It's like a lazy thief and an actual designer made the movie. It's 50-50 whether your Rebel Moon thing is going to be a robot with cool engravings and a complex personality, or a literal lightsaber.

[HaemishM]

It's Zak Snyder. Lazy writing mixed with a strong sense of visual design that favors style over sense is kind of his thing.

[Samwise]

I hadn't even heard of this movie, but the fact that its thread has immediately turned into Rogue One Thread #7 tells me all I need to know about it.   

[Velorath]

One is a Star Wars movie that's a bad Seven Samurai knock-off, and the other is a Seven Samurai knock-off that was originally pitched as a Star Wars movie. The comparisons basically make themselves at that point. It's a template that should be ridiculously easy to copy as it largely amounts to "make 7 likable characters and then put them in danger".

[MediumHigh]

I don't think Zack Synder can read. Which would explain his fanbase for one but also makes something like watching Rebel Moon hilarious.

You see, In the grim darkness of the fuckit-millenia there is imperalist empire of man bringing vengence and wrath upon traitors and xeno in the name of their god emperor. According to Zack Synder thats starwars 🤣🤣😭🤣😭.

In a weird way zack synder accidentally made 40k a movie, and he made it lore accurate by accident. Granted this movie was boring as fuck but the sheer comedy of trying to make a star wars fan fiction and end up in relatively accurate portrayal of the Imperium of Man from the perspective of a some random medieval farm planet is peak hilarity.

[Riggswolfe]

Zack Snyder is in such a weird place in my list of directors.

Some directors are just objectively awful and I rarely voluntarily watch their movies. I put Michael Bay here. I also put Paul Greengrass here which I know will piss some people off but his camera work is so awful I find his movies unwatchable. Other directors are at the other end of the scale for most of their movies. Christopher Nolan is probably a classic example.

Zack Snyder is weird though. I feel like if he could let go of some of his fetishes and get a good script, he could be a decent director. Let color back into his movies. Stop having super slo-mo constantly. Stop being so torn on how he feels about women. Some of his movies are honestly fun watches for me personally (Watchmen is one of those) and some of them are guilty pleasure movies that I feel icky for liking. (Sucker Punch).

The weirdest thing about Snyder in my opinion though is the weird almost cult-ish fan base he's developed during his DC work. I mean, some of those people are ready to go to war over DC now being run by James Gunn. It's just bizarre.

[Threash]

So of course this dumpster fire of a movie is a massive fucking hit.

[HaemishM]

I actually have contemplated watching it for the same reason I watched Army of the Dead. It's a pure hate watch, and I love to make fun of shitty movies.

I am part of the problem.

[Riggswolfe]

So of course this dumpster fire of a movie is a massive fucking hit.

I'm sure at least part of it is those irrational Snyder fans I mentioned. Some of them seem to be on a crusade to prove he's the most amazing director ever and DC films will tank with him gone.

[Tale]

I think it's just seasonal. Big dumb festive season blockbuster on the platform everybody uses.

[Surlyboi]

Zack Snyder is in such a weird place in my list of directors.

Some directors are just objectively awful and I rarely voluntarily watch their movies. I put Michael Bay here. I also put Paul Greengrass here which I know will piss some people off but his camera work is so awful I find his movies unwatchable. Other directors are at the other end of the scale for most of their movies. Christopher Nolan is probably a classic example.

Zack Snyder is weird though. I feel like if he could let go of some of his fetishes and get a good script, he could be a decent director. Let color back into his movies. Stop having super slo-mo constantly. Stop being so torn on how he feels about women. Some of his movies are honestly fun watches for me personally (Watchmen is one of those) and some of them are guilty pleasure movies that I feel icky for liking. (Sucker Punch).

The weirdest thing about Snyder in my opinion though is the weird almost cult-ish fan base he's developed during his DC work. I mean, some of those people are ready to go to war over DC now being run by James Gunn. It's just bizarre.

Snyder has an amazing eye for cinematography and scene blocking.

That's it. Somehow, someone convinced him he was a decent director. His cult following is mostly anti-woke types with the same issues with women he has. they were there well before the DC flicks.

[Raguel]

Since we are all dumping on the guy, I've always thought it strange that the one movie where I felt genuine human emotion is the one where everyone is stoic (300). Maybe that's a me problem but I wanted to know what everyone else thought.

[Riggswolfe]

Since we are all dumping on the guy, I've always thought it strange that the one movie where I felt genuine human emotion is the one where everyone is stoic (300). Maybe that's a me problem but I wanted to know what everyone else thought.

This is going to sound bizarre but 300 works, I think, because Snyder turns his objectifying gaze from women to men and because of how it's filmed it actually makes the movie feel epic. It's definitely a case of lightning in a bottle. I personally only watched 300 once but I know people that adore that movie and can't stand anything else he's done.

Snyder has an amazing eye for cinematography and scene blocking.

That's it. Somehow, someone convinced him he was a decent director. His cult following is mostly anti-woke types with the same issues with women he has. they were there well before the DC flicks.

I guess I just didn't notice his cult following prior to DC. He was a director I was aware of back then but didn't much care about. I'd watch a movie of his every once in awhile and go "that was kind of fun but man, why does he hate color?" or "this guy has serious issues with women doesn't he?" and then promptly forget he existed. DC made that much harder.

Anyway, I do agree with your assessment of his skillset. I think this is why I made my comment about how if he could get rid of his fetishes and get a good script he could be a genuinely good director. He'd never be a Christopher Nolan but he'd be, well,  not Zach Snyder and that's a step up. He'd be one of those serviceable directors whose movies are usually decent but don't make people rave about them.

[HaemishM]

The people who truly adore 300 do so because they completely misunderstand it.

[Riggswolfe]

The people who truly adore 300 do so because they completely misunderstand it.

I have a friend who loves it but it is purely on a surface level of "Oh the spear fighting and stuff is so cool!" To be fair, I only saw it once and wasn't too interested in deconstructing it.

[Threash]

That's the only level, anyone thinking there is more is wrong.

[Rendakor]

300 is awesome, because cool spear fighting and lots of quotable lines. It helps that it came out in the early days of meme culture, and was one of the first movies that memes were made out of when it was new. Gladiator is a better movie, but I'd rather rewatch 300 than Troy, or Kingdom of Heaven. The Spartacus TV series has the same vibe as 300, and is similarly one of my favorites.

[Samwise]

300 is like Starship Troopers in that it's jingoistic to the point of self-parody.  In the case of 300 it's not nearly as obvious and it's debatable whether the parody aspect is even intentional (although it's certainly there if you look for it).  In the Starship Troopers case it's blindingly obvious and that still doesn't stop chuds from loving it for exactly the wrong reasons.

[Riggswolfe]

300 is like Starship Troopers in that it's jingoistic to the point of self-parody.  In the case of 300 it's not nearly as obvious and it's debatable whether the parody aspect is even intentional (although it's certainly there if you look for it).  In the Starship Troopers case it's blindingly obvious and that still doesn't stop chuds from loving it for exactly the wrong reasons.

The difference is that Paul Verhoeven very purposefully made a satire of fascism that a lot of people missed sadly despite the blatant imagery. Hell, a lot of people still miss that the bugs are probably not even responsible for any of the events of the movie and it's the humans attacking them with the asteroid strike at the beginning most likely being a false flag.

300 is, I think, honestly just oiled up men with spears stabbing Persians at the end of the day. I know Zack Snyder has made some claims that you're not supposed to root for Leonidas and the Spartans but the movie, unlike Starship Troopers, fetishes them to the point where I find his claims doubtful.

[Threash]

300 is like Starship Troopers in that it's jingoistic to the point of self-parody.  In the case of 300 it's not nearly as obvious and it's debatable whether the parody aspect is even intentional (although it's certainly there if you look for it).  In the Starship Troopers case it's blindingly obvious and that still doesn't stop chuds from loving it for exactly the wrong reasons.

The difference is that Paul Verhoeven very purposefully made a satire of fascism that a lot of people missed sadly despite the blatant imagery. Hell, a lot of people still miss that the bugs are probably not even responsible for any of the events of the movie and it's the humans attacking them with the asteroid strike at the beginning most likely being a false flag.

300 is, I think, honestly just oiled up men with spears stabbing Persians at the end of the day. I know Zack Snyder has made some claims that you're not supposed to root for Leonidas and the Spartans but the movie, unlike Starship Troopers, fetishes them to the point where I find his claims doubtful.

This. You can make the parody argument about the graphic novel 300 was based on for sure. The movie though was just male strippers and great fight choreography, it does not go any deeper than that.

[Johny Cee]

300 is like Starship Troopers in that it's jingoistic to the point of self-parody.  In the case of 300 it's not nearly as obvious and it's debatable whether the parody aspect is even intentional (although it's certainly there if you look for it).  In the Starship Troopers case it's blindingly obvious and that still doesn't stop chuds from loving it for exactly the wrong reasons.

The difference is that Paul Verhoeven very purposefully made a satire of fascism that a lot of people missed sadly despite the blatant imagery. Hell, a lot of people still miss that the bugs are probably not even responsible for any of the events of the movie and it's the humans attacking them with the asteroid strike at the beginning most likely being a false flag.

300 is, I think, honestly just oiled up men with spears stabbing Persians at the end of the day. I know Zack Snyder has made some claims that you're not supposed to root for Leonidas and the Spartans but the movie, unlike Starship Troopers, fetishes them to the point where I find his claims doubtful.

Starship Troopers just isn't very good satire, partly from poor execution and partly because its not sure what it is satirizing.  (Even at the time, people pegged the satire)

If you cast hot people and portray them as sympathetic underdogs, and make the enemy literally faceless things that brutally rip the folks we've been following apart?  The only sketchy bits were a couple of the bits in training, and a couple of the commercials but the comedy tone was so high its tough to take them as serious content.  It's the old "there is no such thing as an antiwar movie" where if you make the thing you are satirizing look super awesome than it really isn't satire.  

The absurd gung-ho attitudes and zeal is just how people talk and commit to a cause...  any cause.  Have we not seen the ridiculous way Twitter mobs work?  The pure toxic sludge that gets justified?  How your team jersey determines appropriate and inappropriate behavior?  We are seeing it play out in real time as the Gaza situation deteriorates, and folks take to social media to proclaim propaganda slogans.

The satire was also pretty meh because the Dutch Pervert didn't know exactly what he was satirizing.  Like, US culture or Hollywood and Hollywood action movies or the original book or militarism or no, wait, its a satire of an American Fascist propaganda movie.  Or something.  It was confused.

Also?  All of his films I've seen feel really samey.  Broad critiques and over-the-top objectification or violence with the same tone again and again, but meant to critique different things each time.  Its why the wheels came off so hard with Showgirls, as it became apparent that Verhoeven was basically regurgitating the same anti-Americansims through the lens of a Dutch Pervert Jesus Scholar again and again.  (Rewatch his films to see the Jesus parallels and the Madonna/Whores variations!  Also the weird full frontal nun in Flesh and Blood!)
__________________

I think Verhoeven and Snyder are very comparable, actually.

It seems like Snyder wants to put women very center in some of his movies, but it just doesn't work and feels sleazy and objectifying.  Sarah Polley in Dawn is wonderful.  300 is a sausage fest besides the nothing Lena Hedley part.  Sucker Punch wanted to say something about how society treats women, but fuck me if it wasn't shot in Anime Creep Vision and 90% incoherent.  After that I was out.  Honestly, one of my best choices!  


I just don't fucking understand why you people keep punching yourselves in the dicks, and then come online to talk about how punching yourself in the dick hurts.  

[Threash]

I just don't fucking understand why you people keep punching yourselves in the dicks, and then come online to talk about how punching yourself in the dick hurts.  

I liked 300 and Watchmen and Dawn of the Dead and the DC movies were at least tolerable and the trailer was good damnit. Before this I never thought of Zack Snyder as someone to avoid, only as someone with an idiotic fan base, and that doesn't stop me from watching Rick and Morty.

[Riggswolfe]

Starship Troopers just isn't very good satire, partly from poor execution and partly because its not sure what it is satirizing.  (Even at the time, people pegged the satire)

Regardless of personal opinions on Verhoeven's movies in general (I like some, dislike others, mostly his sci-fi. I mean, Robocop is just a fun movie damn it and so is Total Recall!) I have to disagree with this statement. Starship Troopers is 100% sure what it is satirizing and it isn't at all subtle about it. I mean, by the end of the movie they have Neil Patrick Harris walking around in essentially an SS uniform. It is 100% satirizing jingoism, nationalism and fascism. I don't think it's directed at any one country or culture in particular despite the obvious references which I think were there just to hammer home the fascism angle so people had no chance of missing it.

[Rendakor]

300 is like Starship Troopers in that it's jingoistic to the point of self-parody.  In the case of 300 it's not nearly as obvious and it's debatable whether the parody aspect is even intentional (although it's certainly there if you look for it).  In the Starship Troopers case it's blindingly obvious and that still doesn't stop chuds from loving it for exactly the wrong reasons.

I'm honestly struggling to see what 300 is even parodying.

[HaemishM]

300 came from a very weird period in Frank Miller's work. It was before he lost his goddamn mind due to 9/11 and turned from a very libertarian sort of anti-fascist to a hardcore kill the Muslims type. He has always had characters who were very clearly written and drawn in an extremely exaggerated way not so much as satire on heroes like Dirty Harry and Bronson in Death Wish, more like a meta commentary on how much like superheroes those characters are. His Batman is almost openly fascist but in that weird ass libertarian way that tries to make him both an anti-establishment rebel while essentially violently punishing those who would transgress against his authoritarian moral code. 300 is similar in that the story is told from the perspective of an unreliable narrator who is purposely exaggerating the heroism of the deeds of the 300 because he is a propagandist, preparing the troops for battle against the demonic enemy seeking to wipe out the perfect Spartan civilization. I've always viewed it as a kind of commentary on the dangers of making all conflicts an ideological war between the defenders of the greatest society on earth and the ultimate evil that seeks to destroy humanity.

The problem is that that message is unstated and a fairly subtle one at that, especially if you are easily distracted by great action set pieces. I'm honestly unsure if Snyder can even understand the message, much less convey its nuances. Nuance is not his style, but over the top action, he's all about that.