TychoCelchuuu

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    2800

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TychoCelchuuu

  1. Posted

    I think the entire distinction is pointless no matter what it means, but I was just curious what @Patrick R meant because it sounded different from the usual definition (which I agree is typically applied to books, not to movies, probably because the distinction is more noticeable in a book, where any technology has to be explained with words, whereas a movie can just show a science thing on screen for five seconds). I also forgot that Snowpiercer had a perpetual motion machine - if I had remembered that, I wouldn't have labeled it hard sci-fi.

  2. Posted

    9 hours ago, Patrick R said:

    My conception of "hard sci-fi" may be mine alone. 

    I think so. Usually "hard sci-fi" means there's an attempt to be (more or less) scientifically plausible, whereas non-hard sci-fi doesn't make the attempt. So for instance something like Star Trek or Star Wars wouldn't be hard sci-fi, because it's basically just space magic that does whatever it needs to for the story, whereas Gravity and Inception would be hard sci-fi because they don't continually break the laws of physics or rewrite the rules of technology in each scene. Thus typically Under the Skin would go in the non-hard sci-fi category because the little technology that's in there is basically magic, whereas Snowpiercer would be hard sci-fi because it's pretty much just a big train.

  3. Posted

    15 hours ago, Patrick R said:

    This also happened with Neil Blompkamp, now that I think about it. Also I'm not a huge fan of Alex Garland, though response to his work seems to be trending up instead of down so maybe I'll be more into Annihilation than I was Ex Machina. Either way, me and critically acclaimed mid-budget contemporary sci-fi films don't seem to get along. Meanwhile Shane Carruth and James Ward Byrkit's work is either ignored or met with mixed response and neither of them have made a movie in 5 years. :(

     

    This made me curious so I looked it up. Here are hard sci-fi films from this decade I loved: Under the Skin, Coherence, Upstream Color, World of Tomorrow. You take off the "hard" restriction and you can add Gravity, Snowpiercer, and potentially Inception & Cloud Atlas (loved at the time, doubt I'd love as much now) and potentially Contagion and Shin Godzilla (could be considered sci-fi but feel like wildly different things).

    What makes Under the Skin "hard" sci-fi but Inception, Snowpiercer, and Gravity not "hard" sci-fi?

  18. Posted

    Finished listening. Great podcast. Very good endorsements (learning that televised curling mics the players made me want to watch it immediately) and the wine discussion was everything I could've hoped for with that email. Jake's reaction to "Important If Crew" was great.

     

    Chris, one nice thing you can use Marmite for is adding it to stews and other sorts of things that you want to be savory. It's a good way to acclimate yourself to it gently, by introducing some Marmite notes into stuff you're already eating.

  22. Posted

    They're three pretty different movies. Pretty much the only things they have in common is that they're about Iron Man and War Machine. My favorite parts of Iron Man 3 are the whole Mandarin situation, Iron Man's character arc, the humor, Miguel Ferrer showing up, and the fact that Shane Black set another movie during Christmas.

  23. Posted

    6 hours ago, plasticflesh said:

    Ugh those descriptions of mechanical misogyny in this game is not a compelling inspiration to continue my play. I haven't played more since that Sunday session. Maybe I'll log in and do some squats though. 

     

    May the lord dam my forsaken void of temperance to build a bulwark against future impulsive torrents of un-researched purchased based on unverified anecdotes. An industrious and diligent beaver lord, using his holy flat beaver tail to dam it up with logs of research and knowledge. With a dry little hovel inside for baby lord beavers.

    If it makes you feel any better, there's tons of misogyny in most other video games too.

  24. Posted

    I liked it but I like all the Marvel movies basically. I'd say it's my third favorite, behind Iron Man 3 and Thor: Ragnarok. It's also impressive that it's high up because mostly I just watch the Marvel movies for the goofs and Black Panther doesn't have a ton of jokes. I guess I also watch for the spectacle, and Black Panther's spectacle is pretty great, plus the soundtrack is really good, the villain is interesting, every single actor is amazing, there's some gorgeous costume design, and I like cats, and panthers are cats, right?