Zerstören sie wirklich teure Autos in Filmen?

Zerstören sie wirklich teure Autos in Filmen?

Ja in der Tat. In jüngster Zeit begnügen sich die großen Studios jedoch damit, die Zerstörung teurer Autos auf Filme zu beschränken, in deren Drehbuch eine Autozerstörung vorliegt - beispielsweise in Filmen mit einer Verfolgungsjagd oder einem Autounfall. Es ist nicht mehr so wie früher in Hollywood, als die Zerstörung von Autos ein häufiges Phänomen in jedem Film war, unabhängig vom Genre. Seltsamerweise kam es vor allem bei Western und Schößchen zur Zerstörung von Autos. Während der Dreharbeiten zu „Cleopatra“ (1963, Joseph L. Mankiewicz) wurden bis zu hundert Autos zerstört, darunter Porsches, Lamborghinis und Ferraris. Sie wurden normalerweise von einer Klippe geworfen, aber es war auch üblich, sie mit einem Holzhammer zu Schrott zu zerkleinern.

The Most Dangerous Superhero

The Flash : The Most Dangerous Superhero

The Flash ... 

False. A man with super speed might sound easy enough to beat ... But, actually? If Flash pushes himself to the peak of potential, he can destroy the world.

For one thing, Flash can move so fast that time almost stops. According to him, he could see events that lasted "less than a second" (Superman Grounded).

However, it does not stop there. Flash can also steal speed from enemies, making them frozen in space (JLA 2006 # 23).

In addition, it can accelerate the speed of light and punch someone - basically punching them with "unlimited mass" (JLA Vol. 1).

In fact, "unlimited mass blows" are not even his worst attacks. Flash can vibrate so fast that it will move the molecular structure of whatever it phases in stages. Better said: he can make someone separate, molecule by molecule, just by touching it (Flash 1987 # 101).

And this is just what I consider some of its more threatening strengths. Flash is also shown using its power to create whirlwinds, throw electricity, phase through objects, build entire structures in a second ... The list is endless.

If Flash really wants to destroy someone? Nothing can stop it.

Bad because of all this? I haven't even mentioned Flash's most dangerous ability: time travel. During Flashpoint, after traveling back in time, Flash ends reset Earth 0, and triggers a chain reaction that rearranges the entire DC Multiverse.

This is not an isolated achievement, either - there are many other examples of flash mucking time too (like First Year Flash).

Flash can't just rip someone by molecule by molecule ... He can erase it from time completely, as if it never existed.

When people talk about the most dangerous superheroes, they like to talk about people like Thor or Superman. However, Flash can do things that will make them stretch.

The only reason Flash didn't crack in the midst of all the tragedies he experienced, and used his strength to completely destroy his enemies? Deep down, he has a big heart. He cares about the people he protects, and the lives he leads. He will not exchange it for the world.

Correlation Between Tenet and Inception movie

Correlation Between Tenet and Inception movie

My theory is yes, the big twist at the end of Tenet will be it is in the same universe as Inception.

So how do I support this?

1. It makes narrative sense. Nolan wanting to combine his epic, original sci-fi action films to create a massive movie with both concepts combined is the exact sort of ambitious thing he would do.
2. It makes financial sense. A film that combined Inception and Tenet would make a killing at the box office.
3. It would get people talking. Nolan loves making people talk about the ending of his films. A great twist or ambiguous ending involving how the universes are combined is exactly something Nolan would jump at.
4. Michael Caine. He is Nolan’s diversion. In Inception, Caine was a wise, important professor. Most people would write off Caine’s involvement in both films as proof they aren’t connected. My prediction is that he is introduced in Tenet as an unnamed mentor. Only at the end will you realize it’s the same character he played in Inception.
5. Cillian Murphy? Tom Hardy? Joseph Gordon Levitt? All of the Nolan regulars that couldn’t go unnamed are suspiciously absent from the cast of Tenet. Either this is a coincidence, or they already have roles in Tenet’s universe.

So there we are. My theory, which is probably incorrect, is that everyone besides me will be shocked at the end of Nolan’s Tenet.

Explanation Of Tenet (2020) Christopher Nolan Movie

Explanation Of  Tenet (2020) Christopher Nolan Movie

So "Tenet" is a spy thriller involving time travel. As Sheikh Mubashir pointed out, this film will be a kind of "Palindrome", which is also the case for the film's title. Tenet is read as backwards.

My theory about films by analyzing trailers is:

That a coalition of security agencies made up of different countries (Britain, the US, India and maybe some other European countries) is using time travel to stop an unknown organization from starting World War III. Time travel allows spies / agents to jump forward in time. Agents / spies remain in the "present", but upon their arrival, their environment begins to move back in time. So they use travel time to assess the current situation backwards to prevent it from happening when everything returns to the present.

My other theory is the same as above but that time is used by unknown organizations to create havoc by changing time and creating time gaps in the world. Some things go backwards from the future while other parts of the time still exist, causing mass confusion and chaos. The agent (protagonist) is therefore used to intercept this time changing and preventing certain events from happening when assessing events when backwards in time.

The point is, it involves time travel and because of that "Palindrome", the film's events go back and forth. I just take it.

Honestly, a little ironic pleasure is my favorite part. The rest are just badly edited clips and chaotic expositions.

There is a trailer segment in which some girls explain to John David Washington how time mechanics work. But he only has 5 seconds so that sounds confusing and stupid. Not only do I not know what the premise is, it sounds bad.

My guess is that this exposition will spread throughout the film and not be confused at all. But it did not appear in the trailer.

So one second about Tenet said, then the girl talked about the apocalypse, then Michael Caine talked about Russian citizens, then there was a thing called inversion. Obviously this will be a film that has too much time to fit in 2 minutes.

The four story lines are diverted between the entire trailer and it's a big mess.

The actions we see look very basic, as is cinematography. I'm sure it will be much better in the actual film.

Review Sonic The Hedgedog (2020)

Review Sonic The Hedgedog (2020)

That is alright. Basically harmless children's films (not family films, children's films) with nothing creative or surprising. This is a very safe film ... Remade Sonic certainly looks better, but nothing out of the ordinary. Not much in film for old sonic fans. A pair of Green Hill remixes, some chilidogs, Mushroom Hill and not much more. In fact, most of the references to the game are actually in the final credit.

Sonic itself was changed to attract a new younger audience than older fans. Flossing alone makes it very clear. That's still Sonic. They are more focused on the "happy-go-lucky" and "friendship is everything" parts rather than the "past the past" and "freedom against the rebels" sections. He was almost as tense as Kirby.

The plot itself is quite simple and seems to be written for children who won't think too hard about it. It's better if you turn your mind off and watch it for occasional sentimental and funny moments. If you start thinking too hard, you notice that many things happen because the plot needs to move forward, not because it really makes sense. This will help if they haven't shown most of the best parts of the film in the trailer. The rest doesn't really match that.

Overall, I do not regret watching it. That's not a bad movie. I can't see myself going out of my way to watch it again someday. If there is a sequel, I might just watch it because I like to see it all to the end. I will give 7/10. C. solid

End Explanation of Extraction (Netflix 2020) Movie

End Explanation of "extraction" (Netflix 2020) movie

8 months later we joined Ovi at a swimming pool where he was diving. This is similar to how Rake showed that he became more like him than his father. He found himself valuable and had reasons to continue as Rake did, looking for a mission that deserved to die.

Amir is a killer by contacting Rakes and Ovi out of the water and looking at a man who may or may not Rake.

Now whether this is it or not, we don't know for sure, but we can take a lot from it. Maybe Rake survived and got out of this situation.

However, it is also possible that this brings symbolism with it that Rake will always be a part of Ovi's life now and in some cases the boy will have him with him in his mind, guiding him.

There are actually two ways you can take it, personally I take sides with a more literal version with Rake coming alive because we have never seen his body, however, it can also be taken when he looks at him and becomes part of his life on a spiritual level.

As you wish, I suppose, but I think he is out there and he must now lie because of how many policemen he killed. I don't have a definite answer but that's how I took it. This is a great ambiguous way to end a movie that really allows you to do it.

With millions of people still locked up at home because of Coronavirus with lots of free time on their hands, Netflix Extraction has generated a lot of buzz since it was dropped on the streaming platform yesterday, with fans apparently getting a real kick from seeing Chris Hemsworth become the title of an old school action film with body counts the tall and super heroic insight of Hargrave's debut feature instantly makes it a name to watch in the action genre, with Extraction basically 117 minute wall-to-wall set-pieces that throw away everything except the kitchen sink at Hemsworth's Tyler Rake. Although it is not exactly reinventing the wheel when it comes to stories, and most of the plots are the same thing that we have seen in countless similar films over the years, the choreography that is staged by experts and often brutal violence is what separates from the package .

Netflix seems to have franchise potential in mind for Tyler Rake, too, and one of the most discussed aspects of Extraction is the end. After apparently suffering a fatal gunshot wound, the grizzled veteran fell from the bridge with what appeared to be his last strength, with the film ready to end with a real downer.

However, the last shot of this film shows a character who is intentionally out of focus, meaning Hemsworth may or will not return to shoot, stab, and kill more bad people in the future. In a recent interview, Hargrave explained the decision to end extraction in an ambiguous tone, acknowledging that the real end is whatever the viewer wants.

The ending of most action films tends to be very black-and-white, so it's refreshing to see Extraction try something a little different. We just have to leave it to you to decide whether Tyler Rake is safe or not.

Movie Review Extraction (2020)

Movie Review Extraction (2020)

Predictable plot, cliché screenplay, unimaginative action sequences, stereotypical settings, poor background scores, just another series of Hollywood run-of-the-mill actions, not worth the hype.

Spoilers in front. The film is too bad for anything to spoil it further but still if you want to not know about something that might be predictable such as the order of days of the week, you are warned not to read further.

One Hollywood director thought, "Let's make an action film, let's hire top Hollywood actors like Chris Hemsworth and let's put the arrangements in a third world country". This is the total amount of thought that has been used in making this film. You do a Google search for 10 Hollywood action movie cliches and the first link will take you to the Netflix page of the Extraction movie. Maybe the producers think that in the midst of this Corona lockdown the audience will be so bored that they believe it is entertainment. Believe me, banging equipment on the balcony as told by our PM is more entertaining than watching this film.

So let's see what's in the film:


Protagonist: Chris Hemsworth. He is a mercenary. Ok, so clearly he knows all karate, jujutsu, taekwando, chokeslam, elbows, genealogies, etc. And is the master of all weapons be it rifles, machine guns, grenades, pepper spray or sling shots. He works only for money. You told him about the extraction mission thousands of miles away in the third world country and he agreed to do it. He is not a coward to spend time analyzing threats, looking at surveillance or asking for prize money. Some morons at the extraction site said extraction was impossible but he did not know that Chris Hemsworth was on this mission and if the scouts had seen Hemsworth's blackboard abs, he would believe that nothing was impossible for him.

So, even though the protagonist is a mercenary merciless but he has a soft side. Ok, so how does a cruel guy turn out to have a soft side? Think. Umm, a boyfriend is waiting for him? Not. So what about children? Bingo! And how do we sympathize for children? The boy died of cancer. Ok, so we feel sad for the protagonist now. He lost his child and he was sent on a mission to extract other children. So what will happen? He will find money but will develop feelings for the child because he will remind him of his own child. Never expected change of this event.


Supporting actor: Randeep Hooda. He is a security agent for the Indian mafia. He will fight with Hemsworth so he must also have fighting skills and murder weapons. But, how can he move? Oh, he was in the generic "Special Forces" troops because the writer was too bad to find the name of special forces in India such as the Black Cat Command. His boss's son was kidnapped so he soon went to Bangladesh. He would put his life in extraordinary danger for this child. Why is that? If not, the boss will kill his children. Ok, so another child is in danger. So, at first it seemed like he was a criminal but it turned out he was on Hemsworth's side. Hmm, two protagonists. So what will happen? Umm, the secondary protagonist will die while saving the main protagonist. Bingo! And that is not surprising because right before the last sequence of actions he called his wife that if he did not call within the next 12 hours then he would have to flee to an unknown place with "money".

Hooda despite being a brilliant actor, can't do much in this film.


The child: The child is a generic rich kid from India. So the authors think, "What do rich kids do in India?" Someone answered, "Oh, they must be smoking weed in the back alley of a club, just like in the US". So, that's how the kidnappers found him, when he smoked cannabis in the back alley.

This child was brought to Bangladesh by a kidnapper. The protagonist saves him from a generic kidnapper. Initially the child did not trust the protagonist, but in turn surprised from the events he developed "Stockholm Syndrome" and began to trust him and with the final battle scenes, developed emotions for him.

Villian: Think of yourself as an American, and try to imagine a bad person from a South Asian country. Ok so the bad guy is the king of drugs, he is Pablo Escobar from Bangladesh. But because all the third world countries are banana republics in the eyes of the Americans, the bad guy has all the governments and armies in his pocket.

Action: Shaky Cammera, many explosions, several summer cars and many imaginative scenes that are not imaginative. The protagonist has unlimited ammunition and unlimited health cheat codes. The goal has 100% accuracy but bad people only shoot around him and always seem to fail to shoot the protagonist. The last assassination shot on the protagonist was taken by the person who had promised to kill Hemsworth beforehand, what are the chances. Before that a colonel who acted like a cupbearer for criminals, suddenly acquired the skills of a sniper killer and killed the secondary protagonist. He was about to kill Hemsworth but unlucky, only at the last moment, a female maid of the protagonist killed him, another shocking event.

So, in the end you take the film 'Taken', delete Liam Neeson, add Hemsworth, subtract Europe add Bangladesh, subtract east European antagonists add Bangladesh antagonist, and you get 'Extraction'.

Wasting my time on it while skipping Mahabharata. At least Mahabharat's action scenes are unpredictable, you never know whose arrow will disappear first in the two arrow clash. I will watch the broadcast again tomorrow.

Ending of season 1 of "The Man in the High Castle"

 Ending of season 1 of "The Man in the High Castle"

I suggest reading the book which will give a much greater insight into the 'meaning'.

The Man in the High Castle stands out when looking at all the books Philip K Dick wrote. They are all wacky in their own way and all have an element of not knowing the difference between something that is fake and reality.

Spoilers for the book follow!

But in this book Dick took it a step further, using the I Ching to actually write the book, and in the final chapter of the book  make some revelations that The Man In the High Castle is actually in some way Philip K Dick himself. It's a book about himself writing a book about the 'real world' in an alternative reality.

What does it all mean? The book more deeply explores themes faced by Tagomi and Childan around racism, balance, war etc. It tries to emphasise that the world they inhabit is different from our own world in a historical sense, but the same as our world in terms of moral perspective and human nature.

It concludes with each character reaching a 'higher ideal' - for example, Childan is tormented in the book as someone who sees the Japanese as superior to the Americans. He sees himself as an inferior race. In the book he finally finds the strength to stand up for American culture and artwork. Frink finds a way to instil truth into his own artwork and create something beyond forgeries. Tagomi rebels against the Nazis and finds balance.

I don't think the series explores these themes as seriously or deeply, so the ending is especially hard to interpret. I don't think the book is as cryptic - it's showing how in either world there are fundamental themes of morality that are important.

End Explanation of Black Mirror: Striking Vipers

End Explanation of Black Mirror: Striking Vipers

Striking Vipers for me, was the best of this ‘not so good’ season. With the 3rd episode being the worst Black Mirror episode ever!

When Karl is at Dany’s home for dinner, he tries to convince Karl that it is the best experience he has ever had and Dany knows it. Although both don’t feel it after their real-life kiss, but can’t deny their chemistry within the game. Both enter into a physical fight and it feels that their virtual relationship is over for good.

Danny’s wife questions him while returning from the police station, he tells her the truth. She also realizes their marriage has been missing the old spark and makes peace with herself that their marriage will never be the same anymore.

But to keep some excitement in their lives, they make a pact that on Danny’s birthday every year (which is the crossed out day in the calendar, more like a cheat day) they will fulfil their desires. While Dany goes online to enjoy his virtual relationship with Karl, Theo goes out to have a one night stand with a stranger. She had confessed to Danny as he had started ignoring her, she almost had an impulse to do it with a stranger. Their marriage is no more the same, but more of a settlement.

This one night of fantasy goes on to show how virtual reality can distort the actual realities of some lives.

End Explanation of the movie Trading Places

End Explanation of the movie Trading Places

I’ll try to explain this simply but stock stuff can be extremely complicated and I am no expert.

The quick answer is that the two brothers’ firm ends up with a butt load of FCOJ futures contracts that they can’t pay for at the end of the trading day. Can’t pay, they shut you down. Dan and Eddie have FCOJ contracts that cost them little but sell for a lot, so they get rich.

The long answer:

Lets say the current price is $50 for 1000 oranges. However no one has the oranges, they are still growing. JuiceMan contracts to buy 1000 oranges. He will get 1000 oranges at harvest and is obligated for $50. The contract closes at harvest. However he can sell this contract before harvest That’s how all this starts.

So if JuiceMan thinks, at harvest, oranges will be more expensive, say $75/1000, he can collect his 1000 oranges, pay $50 and then sell those oranges to MinuteMaid for $75 and pocket the $25. If he thinks oranges will be cheaper at harvest, he will try to sell his contract to another buyer for $50, maybe less so that he gets his money now and when the oranges are harvested, the other buyer pays $50/1000 oranges but only gets $40 from MinuteMaid, He loses $10. So JuiceMan knowing something the other buyer doesn’t, is how he can pull this off. This works for any commodity where the price fluctuates, regardless of the reason. Oil is by far the most visible of the commodities that trade this way.

Orange crops are dependent on the weather. So if good weather, lots of oranges are picked, the surplus causes the price to drop AT HARVEST time. If the weather is bad, freezing for oranges usually although it could be from a hurricane (assuming Florida), that causes the orange crop to be smaller AT HARVEST. Oranges become more expensive.

So in the movie, Dan and Eddie discover the brothers are going to steal an advanced copy of the orange crop report. D & E swap a fake report for the real one. The fake one says the orange crop was going to be bad, therefore oranges will become more expensive at harvest. The two brothers buy as many FCOJ contracts as they can at the starting price or as it goes up. There’s a scene that shows how the price goes up as they buy. Trading stops as the crop report is read. The crop report is revealed to be good news so there will be an excess of oranges, driving the price down. So the brothers own all these contracts they bought at the starting price or as it went up and owe that amount of money. The price at the end of the scene shows that the price has hit rock bottom and no one is buying FCOJ anymore because they all bought it thinking it would go up in price. D&E buy those contracts knowing that when it’s all said and done, they will pay the bottom price but get the amount on the contracts. This is where they kind of lose me.

To sum, D&E hold contracts that cost the lowest price but sell for a higher one. The brothers hold contracts that cost a high price but sell for the low price. The reason they want to reopen the pit is that if they can get someone to buy the contract, they aren’t obligated to pay anything. But trading is closed. The rules appear to be, end of day, pay for your contracts or else.

Lordy that’s a long answer for what appears to be such a simple plot device in the film. The key is that they can’t pay, so it bankrupts them. I just read a book called The History of the US in Five Crashes. It goes through the five major stock market crashes of the 20th and 21st centuries in pretty good detail and in an understandable way. All five had the same greed factor as the scenario above. It’s an excellent read.

And if I got this wrong, I apologize but I should be close. What has always baffled me is how the D&E were able to get into the buying and selling so easily and such. Maybe someone else could explain that.

End Explanation of the movie "Joker (2019)"

End Explanation of the movie "Joker (2019)"

I have been following Joker since the day it was announced. Undoubtedly, it was one of the most anticipated movies of the year. Heath Ledger had set bar very high and Jouquin Phoenix has true potential to match (or even surpass) that, given his previous portayels of mentally disturbed/unstable/odd/wierd characters. But director choice was bit odd. Todd Philips had no known history with serious gritty drama, but still studio decided to go with him - means something convincing must be there in story line he came up with (he is both writer and director) and his vision for the movie! So expectations were set beyond excepectations only!

Then, It won golden lion at Venice film festival. Standing ovation (though 8 minutes seems too long :)). Regular news for Scorsese tribute and that era or style of film making. Initial reviews were excellent. IMDb rating stood at 9.5+ with 1000+ of users. But as release date was approching, metascore kept on dropping (and today it stands at 58), many poor/mixed reviews started coming in. So the question, was it just marketing gimmick? Paid reviews, bumped up ratings? Crazy fans? I am pretty sure many of movie lovers and followers, would have been in same dilemma. Only way was to decide by myself! So wait for 2nd October begins ...

Quick recap :

Arthur Fleck. Sad, lonely, malnourisht, late 30s guy living with his old mother in Gotham, working as clown for hire. Has some uncontrollable laughing condition but struggling hard to put smile on his face. Wants to become standup comedian. Bullied on regular basis. Has previous history of mental illness. (Classic stereotype for ticking time bomb). City is going downhill. His medication stops. Delusions start taking over. Kills three employees of Wayne Enterprise when he was dressed as clown. Feels empowered and enjoys killing (with slow and wierd dance). First time experiences freedom! Kisses single mom neighbour. Begins dating her. His standup show. Thomas Wayne comments about 'clown' and lower class. Unrest emerges in city, he being the trigger. Chase for killer is ongoing. He discovers that he is son of Thomas Wayne. Meets Thomas and Bruce Wayne and gets rejected. Knows truth about sadistic, mentally ill and delusional mother. In rage, kills his own mother. Meanwhile, Murry Franklin (his inspiration) makes fun of his standup show on TV. Later he also gets invitation to attend his show. On the day of show, his clown friends arrive at his home, he kills one of them brutally and let other leave. After killing, dresses up as Joker we want to see, decieves police on his tail. Tricks them and provokes crowd to hurt them. On Murray's show, confronts him for humiliation, gives lousy speech about system and all, and shoots him in the face in front of audience. City is already in chaos due to clown incidence. Clown has become symbol of lower class workers. Riots everywhere. While police are taking him, he got hit by truck. Clown mask crowd rescues him. He stands up on wrecked car with bloody smile on his face. Joker rises! We see Arthur with psychiatrist. Has gained weight than earlier. Looks different. Smiles and jokes. Kills therapist and leaves room dancing.

Some twists half way. That his single mom girlfriend doesn't really know him. It was his delusion. This and end therapist scene, makes you question whatever you saw!

Analysis :

If you interpret whole story in linear and literal terms, it appears as movie about mentally ill person going downward spiral turning into joker. Nothing really special about it! Except cinematography, brilliant lighting and exceptional acting by Phoenix.

Unfortunately, he doesn't get any great (worth remembering) lines like Heath Ledger's joker instead Phoenix's acting lies entirely in his body language! All his dance moves (especially one in bathroom with that background score) satisfies you. A strong Oscar worthy performance for sure! Hope he wins this time.

But real beauty of the movie lies somewhere else!

We see whole movie from Arthur's point of view. So he is kind of 'narrator' of this movie. Whatever he sees, feels, experiences; we also see the same, feel and experience. There is no other person or scene in the movie who confirms if it's the reality. Except Sophie incident, where we realize she doesn't really know him. And it's all his delusion! That point onwards, you can't really trust anything you are going to see or saw previously, because he is 'untrustworthy narrator' and we are seeing his narration.

Only way to decipher truth from delusion (as movie provides insufficient data to conclude), is isolating highly improbable events. Whole movie is nothing but sequence of highly improbable events happening in life of single person, which can only happen in mind (or dream, you will know if you are day dreamer :)) and you are calling the shots, controlling world in your head.

We get first glimpse of delusion when he imagines being on Murray's show. He wants to come in front, wants world to see him, love him, and be like the son of Murray like father wanted.

His mother is ill and worked at Wayne mansion seems true.

Getting gun from his fat clown friend is highly unlikely. Why a normal person give a gun to mentally unstable person? May be a knife is enough. Or just empty gun. Unless, person giving a gun is not normal but ... More about it later!

If getting gun is still possible, then killing three Wayne Enterprise employees in empty subway train on empty subway station without anyone witnessing or hearing 6,7 shots or getting caught is also highly unlikely! But possible!

Whole sequence after that (kissing Sophie, standup comedy scene with her) was total delusion. If you want to do stand up comedy at some night club, they can't allow you to go straight on the stage, unless you convince owner/club manager about your stand up gig first. And Arthur has no talent of stand up comedian. So it's again unlikely to get such chance and succeeding in making people laugh, as shown. He doesn't understand what humour means.

Movie explodes after this. Arthur seeing the letter, so easily going near Wayne mansion and meeting Bruce appears too easy to happen. Easily sneaking up in movie theatre without anyone noticing, standing in middle, and meeting Thomas Wayne in bathroom is again too easy to happen. He really wanted father like Thomas wayne (or some famous person like Murray), so he created that version of reality.

At this point of time, he has lost grip of reality and convinced that his mother is root cause of his condition. Actually, 'delusional psychosis' and 'NPD' seems like mental illness of 'real Joker'. He kills his mother, this can be real.

Any sane TV show host cannot show footage of such mentally challenged person on national television. It's sure invitation of public anger, and hampering to his image. Anyways, if standup routine didn't happen, it means Murray showing it on his show and further invitation is all delusion.

On the day of show, if killing fat clown is assumed real then his dwarf friend would have informed police or neighbours or someone by now. But he ends up tricking two policemen and still reach show with gun (bullets of which have already been finished during three murders). So killing Murray didn't happen. It was his version of act for world to notice. Anyways, if standup routine didn't happen, then we can't reach this point of story, unless it is also delusion. Also, his whole speech wasn't that great to serve as climax (according to me).

After such high profile murder, just two police men taking him through riot ridden route is unlikely. He would be followed by media vans, people till his last destination. But no one was with them.

It means some high profile murder didn't happen but he has committed some crime (killing his fat clown friend maybe) for which he is being taken to police custody.

Final act of accident, rescuing, crowd cheering, standing like hero can only happen dreams. If Murray murder didn't happen, then crowd has no reason for cheer unless they are cheering for just one more clown face like them..who has woken up from severe accident.

There is parallel track as well. Where Thomas Wayne's clown remark triggers chaos in city. And unintentinally, Arthur is reason for that chaos. 'Clown' becomes symbol of lower class workers rebellion or revolution against capitalist rich people like Thomas Wayne and bullies like Murray (as per him). Unknowingly, Arthur becomes agent of chaos!

And, All these riots happen because Arthur gets gun!

And, the person who gives gun in hands of mentally unstable person and triggers this chaos - is real 'Joker'! I don't mean his fat friend, but the joker sitting in asylum whose version we are seeing. He is the cause and creater of all this!

Conclusion :

Given this long boring analysis, story of movie Joker is - mix of excerpts from his past and future plans of Joker to create chaos in Gotham.

Arthur is just a decoy. Real joker is the last one sitting in Arkham asylum, admitted there for 'delusional psychosis' and 'NPD'. Mostly he was abused as child and lived life without knowing who his father is. Probably, he has killed his mother and a friend, because of which he is there. These are possible excerpts from joker's life.

Arthur is a just another weak guy (a symbol of lower class who is bullied and abused by rich) who joker will manipulate and make him kill Wayne Enterprise employees. Create situation such that Thomas Wayne remarks something about lower class, and social unrest begins. Liberation of Arthur Fleck is nothing but uprising and revolution of lower class. Anyways, Arthur is too weak and stupid (even after his liberation) to become future JOKER and to go toe to toe against Batman.

So we still don't know who the real joker is, what's his story? What's his point? We just saw one mixed up version of past and future plans from which we can never tell for sure. We believed Arthur is Joker, but he is not and that's the real joke!

Real origin of JOKER is still a mystery, as expected!

On fun side, it's a joke played by Todd Philips on audience by hiding true meaning of movie from studios, even Joaquin Phoenix. A joke played by him on us!

Ending of Netflix Sacred Games season 2

end Explanation of Netflix Sacred Games season 2

Precisely what I've been explaining to everyone. The episode title is a major giveaway. My first assumption was that the pattern lock had to be the Radcliffe line. The first thing I did was to look it up on the map. Although, it didn’t look like it at first and neither has it been shown as a representation of Radcliffe line in the series. Indo-Pak conflict has been a significant topic in Season 2. Also, to top it off, the title of the last episode. So, I stand by this theory.

I think the script writers wanted to end it with a BANG and there’s no duality to the show’s outcome.

1. The pattern can be entered at different scales. The input field is just huge[too many dots] and the same pattern can be entered at different sizes utilising fewer dots or more. To enter the correct pattern, one would actually have to count the dots and the line position. (like start from second line from top)
2. Lack of input prompt for ‘Deactivate’ which suggests there’s only 1 pattern to gain access. The ‘Activate’ prompt was displayed when Shahid was entering the pattern and later it just had the timer and no pattern entry prompt to ‘Deactivate’. Which suggests that the same pattern(Shahid’s) has to be entered to gain access to perform any operation.

I’m glad to see that some of you have the same views about this series. It has beautiful story progression and intricate plot lines. Everyone who’s trashing Season 2 are just here for the cool slang/abuses and Nudity. That’s the only thing you liked about Season 1 and that’s what you expected out of Season 2.

Sacred Games is much more than just that. So, a side note for the haters, keep your bullshit primitive one liners that ‘it’s not as good as Season 1′ to yourself and let others enjoy the show and figure it out for themselves.

STALKER One Of The best Sci-Fi film

The best Sci-Fi film of all time is Andrei Tarkovsky’s STALKER.

The film that nearly killed it’s director.

The film that is every filmmaker’s dream to make a film like this.

There are three men in the film who travel through a mysterious and forbidden territory in the Russian wilderness called the "Zone."

What is happiness? What is the meaning of life? What is the Zone? And what exactly is reality? These questions and many more you will find yourselves asking as you enter the Zone, a place with a Room where all wishes come true. Don't expect too many answers, but try to enjoy the journey, even amidst the decay and ruin of both man and machine.

I watched this film for the first time last year, and I feel the need to see it again. Possibly multiple times.

Stalker left me with a seriously peculiar feeling, one of the strangest I've ever felt watching a film. One where I thought I was almost losing my grip on reality and questioning what makes a human? What is existence?

Stalker is like one of those films that was created as an experience, and not a film.

It is slow, poetic, philosophical.

It actually uses sci-fi as a background for profound human questions.

Review Movie Contagion (2011) Same As Coronavirus

Review Movie Contagion (2011) Same As Coronavirus

If Coronavirus never happened, Contagion would still be an extraordinary film. Witness it in the middle of a pandemic; it was incredible. This is an experience which is poignant and frightening by the state of the world.

(This review is spoiler free)

Steven Soderbergh is the mastermind behind this project. He has always been a director who managed to create nuanced interpretations of what should be a bland premise. Tell him to make a theft movie, he makes Ocean's 11. Tell him to make a sex comedy, he makes Magic Mike.

Tell him to make a disaster movie, he makes a Contagion; nuanced interpretations of what lives in the middle of a pandemic can be like. A nuanced interpretation of how people from all walks of life will react to events that destroy the earth.

When I say all walks of life, he really covers every layer of life. The most remarkable thing about this film is that it combines each plot into a cohesive whole. They all feed each other, carefully developing the themes of the film.

Soderbergh succeeded in completely eliminating the cliché film. There are no bad business people or government officials to worry about. There is no big emotional scene where someone cries over a loved one. We don't need Matt Damon to cry to tell us that millions of dead people are bad. Soderbergh understands this.

Instead, he gives us a global scale through various plot lines. Although it mostly happens in the US and China, it feels like the world is represented.

This film shows the reaction of medical professionals and ordinary people with calmness. From Matt Damon's audience that stood up, it allowed the audience to understand how the community had become depraved, to doctor Marillon Cotillard who was willing to do anything for the vaccine.

This film received a warm welcome from scientists, something that I was not a little surprised after watching. The dialogue feels so authentic throughout the film and a little detail like the process of developing a vaccine that is transmitted to the big screen perfectly.

Of course, you cannot discuss this film without putting it in the context of current events. He gets a very large number, from uncertainty to different archetypes. You have people who say 'just the flu', you have teenagers who are tired of complaining, and of course, internet theorist the consist bloggers. Soderbergh's character makes evil delicious.

We cannot know exactly how exact, because the disease depicted in the picture is far worse than COVID-19, both in death and brutality. But I would not say it would be a stretch that society would really collapse if the virus in the film happened.

Contagion is a brilliant job. One of the most intelligent science fiction films of the last decade.

Who knows, it's always more science than fiction.

Rating: 9/10

Recommendation: A must see. Especially now.

The strangest facts about famous movies

The strangest facts about famous movies

The DeLorean time machine from the film Back to the Future was originally a refrigerator. The ideas in the script were replaced for the safety of children who would go up to the fridge, imitating film actors.

Jim Carrey declined the Walt Disney film studio's offer to play Jack Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean. It was the producer who was initially represented as the captain of the Black Pearl.

Christopher Lee (Saruman) was the only actor from the Lord of the Rings trilogy who read all of Tolkien's books before he was approved for the role. Initially, the actor planned to play Gandalf's gray wizard.
Chewbacca's appearance from the Star Wars film was copied from the appearance of a beloved dog directed by George Lucas. And the name Chewbacca was coined based on the Russian dog word.

To make his character look more realistic, Arnold Schwarzenegger doesn't blink in the Terminator film frame, because he believes that robots don't blink. He also wants to double his role in German personally. But the distributor found the Austrian accent too soft for the hard Terminator.

Back in the early 1990s, James Cameron himself was actively interested in the Spider-Man film project. Charlie Sheen was supposed to play Peter Parker, and Arnold Schwarzenegger - Doctor Octopus. But the project was not destined to become a reality, because the rights to the film were constantly being transferred from one studio to another.

During the filming of West Django, Leonardo DiCaprio, who was not shaved with all his might, hit the table several times with his hand. The actor broke the crystal glass with all his might but continued to play, not paying attention to the pain and blood dripping from his hands, so he was accustomed to that role. In the frame, this scene looks very natural, and it seems like this is the idea of ​​the director.

Steven Spielberg has traditionally not come to take the last scene from his films. This tradition began with the film Jaws: the director was convinced that the actors conspired to drop him into the water after the command "Stop, shot!", And preferred to sit in the trailer.

Ian Fleming, author of the powerful spy novel, loves bird watching and has read a bird expert book named James Bond. This name seems very ordinary, not romantic and is very suitable for heroes. That is why in the film Die Another Day James, under the guise of an ornithologist, Penetrates Cuba, has with him a very real Bond book.

Alfred Hitchcock likes to act in the brilliant acting of his films. In the film To Catch a Thief, for example, he rides a bus next to the main character.

In the comedy, Bruce Almighty God can be called by phone 776-2323. In Buffalo, where the film takes place, the film company bought this number for film making. But in other cities, the owner of the number receives hundreds of calls per day from viewers who want to talk to the Almighty.

The cat for the role in the film The Godfather Marlon Brando himself accidentally took on one of the streets next to the set.

the Bat Family That can defeat Batman

the Bat Family That can defeat Batman

3 members can beat Batman, and I say Batman is holding back most of the time.

because a Batman who doesn't resist destroys the whole Bat Family easily.

(I will not include Barbara Gordon, Stephanie Brown, Tim Drake, Helena Wayne, Selina Kyle, Carrie Kelly, or Damian Wayne.)

1. Cassandra Cain

Cass is listed as a better Martial Artist than Batman, and ranks higher in terms of Martial Artists at DCU.

and I think Bruce even claimed that Cass could defeat him, and that in battle Batman always had to use his gadget.

2. Red Hood

against a Batman who is holding back, Red Hood has been deadlocked and even defeats Batman when he is holding back.

that along with his Experience of More than Dozens of Martial Arts and the willingness to Kill, he could easily take Batman who is holding back.

3. Nightwing

like his brother Jason, Dick is a Master of more than Dozens of Martial Arts and is very skilled at all of them.

and even in training sessions, Dick defeated Bruce in a prolonged battle.

but to be fair, none of these fighters would beat a Batman that didn’t hold back.

don’t believe me, look at this.

Cass is dangerous, but he's not as experienced as Bruce.

and while Jason and Dick have impressive skills, there are regularly defeated by Bat.