ITALY (Botteghino): 'Kung Fu Panda 4' becomes biggest 2024 film

[Rsyu]

I am on my way to the airport to take a plane to visit my aunt in Argentina. I will collaborate with the weak Latin American gross

You saw it early on the OD, didn't you? Did you love it?

There are good parts and so-so parts and then there are the amazing parts. I really loved it but the friends I went with, not so much. But even they agreed the spectacular visuals at least meant it was worth the watch. going for a second viewing over the weekend

You should take your aunt to see it!

[Hernan Gonzalez]

There are good parts and so-so parts and then there are the amazing parts. I really loved it but the friends I went with, not so much. But even they agreed the spectacular visuals at least meant it was worth the watch. going for a second viewing over the weekend

You should take your aunt to see it!

I am sure I am going to agree with you

But my aunt prefers Julia Roberts' kind of movies

[Quigley]

I believe the story and characters were completely uninteresting. Visuals were ok but nothing special. It was pretending to be scientific but it is so inaccurate and exaggerated. If it were true, Nolan should be awarded a Nobel Prize in Physics. I would advise to spend those three hours differently, in a more worthwhile way.

[James]

I believe the story and characters were completely uninteresting. Visuals were ok but nothing special. It was pretending to be scientific but it is so inaccurate and exaggerated. If it were true, Nolan should be awarded a Nobel Prize in Physics. I would advise to spend those three hours differently, in a more worthwhile way.

Like watching Finding Nemo?

[Quigley]

Like watching Finding Nemo?

That film only lasts 1 hour 40 minutes.

[Rsyu]

I believe the story and characters were completely uninteresting. Visuals were ok but nothing special. It was pretending to be scientific but it is so inaccurate and exaggerated. If it were true, Nolan should be awarded a Nobel Prize in Physics. I would advise to spend those three hours differently, in a more worthwhile way.

Renowned worldwide physicist Kip Thorne handled the science of the movie so you're basically laughing at the physicis field in general when you say that. Not to say that everything in it was necessarily true (I mean who can say for sure?), a lot of it was theoretical but that doesn't mean it was "pretending to be scientific"

Edited November 9, 2014 by Rsyu

[Hernan Gonzalez]

Very good Saturday increase for Interstellar!!! It did $1.2m. Cume: $2.2m

[Rsyu]

Very good Saturday increase for Interstellar!!! It did $1.2m. Cume: $2.2m

Excellent! So with a similar sunday that should be $3.3-3.4 million, above gravity's OW by some distance and nearly on par with inception. I think $10 million is reachable

[Hernan Gonzalez]

Excellent! So with a similar sunday that should be $3.3-3.4 million, above gravity's OW by some distance and nearly on par with inception. I think $10 million is reachable

Let's hope for it! Sadly midweek days are pretty weak this time of the year. It needs a very good hold next weekend to reach $10m

[Dementeleus]

Renowned worldwide physicist Kip Thorne handled the science of the movie so you're basically laughing at the physicis field in general when you say that. Not to say that everything in it was necessarily true (I mean who can say for sure?), a lot of it was theoretical but that doesn't mean it was "pretending to be scientific"

 

Nonetheless, some of it was very silly (not the stuff, I'm fairly sure, that Kip Thorne was involved in).

[Quigley]

Renowned worldwide physicist Kip Thorne handled the science of the movie so you're basically laughing at the physicis field in general when you say that. Not to say that everything in it was necessarily true (I mean who can say for sure?), a lot of it was theoretical but that doesn't mean it was "pretending to be scientific"

Cuz you know, people casually pass through back holes and travel to other galaxies.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Quigley

[Rsyu]

Nonetheless, some of it was very silly (not the stuff, I'm fairly sure, that Kip Thorne was involved in).

 

Silly to you, not to me unless you're saying your opinion is the only one that counts  

I'm not sure how you can say to which depth Kip Thorne was involved in or not unless you have some inside knowledge. They say he was consulted in the theoretical parts of the film so that's what I believe

 

 

Cuz you know, people casually pass through back holes and travel to other galaxies.

 

Like I said, it's theoretical. Since no one has passed through black hole or travelled to other galaxies how can you rule it out? People in the past thought that the Earth being round and the earth revolving around the sun were nonsense. Our definition of what's right or wrong isn't set in stone but changes over time as we learn more about it. It's the beauty of discovery

[Quigley]

Like I said, it's theoretical. Since no one has passed through black hole or travelled to other galaxies how can you rule it out? People in the past thought that the Earth being round and the earth revolving around the sun were nonsense. Our definition of what's right or wrong isn't set in stone but changes over time as we learn more about it. It's the beauty of discovery

 

I'm totally fine when someone wants to make up a theory. But the marketing promised something that was scientifically accurate, not scientifically probable (and I still believe it was rather improbable). In a way, I was expecting something more realistic. The second half of the movie is everything but realistic... at least compared to reality as I have experienced it until now. The best description is that it was "not convincingly realistic".

Edited November 9, 2014 by Quigley

[Rsyu]

I'm totally fine when someone wants to make up a theory. But the marketing promised something that was scientifically accurate, not scientifically probable (and I still believe it was rather improbable). In a way, I was expecting something more realistic. The second half of the movie is everything but realistic... at least compared to reality as I have experienced it until now. The best description is that it was "not convincingly realistic".

 

Then you're misunderstanding what the sci-fi genre is. Sci-fi is all about portraying what is scientifically probable and yes, sometimes even the improbable. That isn't to say it isn't scientifically accurate. Unless you have an advanced degree in physics and a theory of your own that proves otherwise. I feel I'm repeating myself here but there's since way of knowing exactly what happens when we drop into a black hole or any of the other elements that appeared in the film, the way they were represented in interstellar is as good a guess as any in my opinion. Imagine going back to even as recent as 100 years ago and showing the people of that time the world of today. I'm sure they'd have been as sceptical and unconvinced by it but nonetheless it's where we find ourselves today. 

 

It's also one of the reasons many people have a problem with labelling Gravity as sci-fi. It's a film grounded in reality and proven scientific fact sure, but it doesn't have any imaginative content that the sci-fi genre should have. It's closer to a space drama film in that sense. 

[Quigley]

Then you're misunderstanding what the sci-fi genre is. Sci-fi is all about portraying what is scientifically probable and yes, sometimes even the improbable. That isn't to say it isn't scientifically accurate. Unless you have an advanced degree in physics and a theory of your own that proves otherwise. I feel I'm repeating myself here but there's since way of knowing exactly what happens when we drop into a black hole or any of the other elements that appeared in the film, the way they were represented in interstellar is as good a guess as any in my opinion. Imagine going back to even as recent as 100 years ago and showing the people of that time the world of today. I'm sure they'd have been as sceptical and unconvinced by it but nonetheless it's where we find ourselves today. 

 

It's also one of the reasons many people have a problem with labelling Gravity as sci-fi. It's a film grounded in reality and proven scientific fact sure, but it doesn't have any imaginative content that the sci-fi genre should have. It's closer to a space drama film in that sense. 

 

Entering a black hole that leads to your daughter's room (as it was 30 years ago) isn't as good a guess as any. It is an extremely wild guess that allows the screenwriter to conveniently resolve the plot.

[Rsyu]

Entering a black hole that leads to your daughter's room (as it was 30 years ago) isn't as good a guess as any. It is an extremely wild guess that allows the screenwriter to conveniently resolve the plot.

 

It doesn't lead to his daughter's room, it's a tesseract that leads to another dimension where the gravity can bleed through time and space and affect things in his past. The most important thing to influence at that time just happened to be his daughter's room.

 

I hope since you only bolded that part you agree with everything else I said

[Quigley]

It doesn't lead to his daughter's room, it's a tesseract that leads to another dimension where the gravity can bleed through time and space and affect things in his past. The most important thing to influence at that time just happened to be his daughter's room.

 

I hope since you only bolded that part you agree with everything else I said

 

I still don't get why it had to lead where it did. I agree Gravity is a space drama film. I just thought Interstellar was going to be more realistic too. It wasn't and, although that may not bother some people, it bothered me, because the marketing gave the impression of a film that would be a science report.

[Rsyu]

I still don't get why it had to lead where it did. I agree Gravity is a space drama film. I just thought Interstellar was going to be more realistic too. It wasn't and, although that may not bother some people, it bothered me, because the marketing gave the impression of a film that would be a science report.

 

If you want that kind of thing then I recommend you watch Cosmos by Charles Sagan. Great documentary series from the 1980s

[Quigley]

If you want that kind of thing then I recommend you watch Cosmos by Charles Sagan. Great documentary series from the 1980s

 

Documentary isn't what I meant by "science report" but, in any case, thank you.

Edited November 10, 2014 by Quigley

[Rsyu]

Interstellar OW: $3.6 million. Solid number