Oblivion - quick review (no major spoilers) (1 Viewer)

[mattCR]

One would think that if they didn't understand Physics. The broken pieces would continue to maintain an orbit around Earth. Perhaps the moon debris was pushed away from the earth during its breaking or, better yet, pushed in the direction of the orbit. Given a rotational velocity, the pieces would continue to orbit our planet, rather than crash into it. Some pieces would crash earthward but most would be drawn together due to gravity. Eventually, the moon pieces would coalesce into a sphere again. Although not mentioned, I'm sure part of the destruction that occured on Earth was due in part to deep imapcts of lunar material.

Too basic. Yes, you're right as a matter of physics if they all maintained a similar distance and rotation, it would continue to orbit. But that's also two dimensional thinking.. in an explosion which would shatter the center of an orbital mass, debris would move in all 360 degrees, some away from the earth, some toward the earth. But the moon as shown moved apart only in seemingly two directions.. also, while they would maintain rotation with earth, we have to remember that each mass would maintain it's own establishment of gravity, and so they would have a high propensity to slam back into each other as much as anything until order was established. This is what we think created the belts on other planets. So, the fact that they just stayed at a set difference from each other separated only on one axis really I couldn't figure that out.

It's just a science nitpick.

 

[Jeff Cooper]

To be fair, I just watched about three minutes of the movie but I guess I just thought it would be bigger like those real Imax screens that I went to as a kid. Perhaps my expectations were just something unrealistic but I just didn't think the size or image was worth the extra money. I watch way too many movies so I usually try to go cheap with the $5 (or $6 AMC shows) so paying an almost extra $10 just didn't seem worth it for me.

I will probably try a complete movie at some point but I'm not sure which one I'll pick to do so.

Sounds like you went to one of those fake IMAX theaters. I.E. it's branded as IMAX, but not a true IMAX screen. If that's the case, don't bother going back for a full movie there, go find a real IMAX theater.

 

[glen_vt]

I liked it. I'm not a Tom Cruise fan...he reached that point a long time ago where it doesn't matter what he's playing, his "star" persona is such that it overwhelms the role and no matter what, it's just "Tom Cruise". Having said that, this was one instance where that persona, that "manufactured" quality Cruise has actually works here, considering the role of Jack...

As someone else mentioned...this movie has an almost "70's" vibe to it I liked that a lot...if it had been made 30-40 years ago, it might've featured Charlton Heston in the lead role.

The production looks great...the music is good, the visuals are pretty stunning. What some are calling derivative...I'll call comfortable or familiar, just like those older "formula" movies or most anything that's on TV these days.

It's worth a look for sure....and I'll pick it up when the BR hits....

 

[Greg.K]

But the moon as shown moved apart only in seemingly two directions.. also, while they would maintain rotation with earth, we have to remember that each mass would maintain it's own establishment of gravity, and so they would have a high propensity to slam back into each other as much as anything until order was established. This is what we think created the belts on other planets. So, the fact that they just stayed at a set difference from each other separated only on one axis really I couldn't figure that out. It's just a science nitpick.

It looked to me like they hit the moon with a single immense kinetic impact along the axis the chunks were lined up. I thought it was a very cool effect, but it looked like a significant amount of the moon remained intact, and it seems to me that its gravity should have started pulling those pieces back together almost immediately.

 

[Brett_M]

Too basic. Yes, you're right as a matter of physics if they all maintained a similar distance and rotation, it would continue to orbit. But that's also two dimensional thinking.. in an explosion which would shatter the center of an orbital mass, debris would move in all 360 degrees, some away from the earth, some toward the earth. But the moon as shown moved apart only in seemingly two directions.. also, while they would maintain rotation with earth, we have to remember that each mass would maintain it's own establishment of gravity, and so they would have a high propensity to slam back into each other as much as anything until order was established. This is what we think created the belts on other planets. So, the fact that they just stayed at a set difference from each other separated only on one axis really I couldn't figure that out.

It's just a science nitpick.

Since we don't know how they broke the moon, I think your nitpick is simply conjecture. Objects don't have gravity. Gravity is a force of attraction between masses. The magnitude of that force is inversely porportional to the distance between the objects. It's actually one of the weakest forces in the universe. Be that as it may, since the moon wasn't completely pulverized into a ring, is it safe to assume that it was broken in a way that would result in what we saw in the film? I'm nitpicking, too, I guess. Setting aside Physics, I think the view of that broken moon was an ominous and sad vista that added to the sense of melancholoy permeating the first half of the film. I was affected. It's one of the visions that has stuck with me.

 

[Tim Glover]

I wasn't particularly enthused about this one but liked it - liked it a lot. Didn't find it to be as predictable as others - thought it nodded to earlier films but didn't rip them off, and I thought it unspooled at a good pace. Not too fast, not too slow - just quick enough to give us an interesting story and let us follow its path.Yes, Cruise does "play Cruise", but he's still fine in the part, and he grounds the film. Much more involving than I expected, and it had a lot more heart than the average sci-fi/action flick - I got a bit choked up at the end and found it to be emotional. Probably the most enjoyable 2013 film I've seen so far...

+1 I loved it. Easily the best film of 2013 so far. Was very impressed.

 

[DaveF]

Oblivion was fun scifi ideas hindered by a mediocre script. I liked the overall twists, the general style. The Patrol Drones were awesome. But the actual storytelling, using big awkward chunks of narrative and flashbacks to tell the tale limited the movie. And the performances -- with Tom Cruise given the only speaking role, and his half-age female eye candy required to be seen but not heard -- also weighted the story as it went along. I tested out the new Alamo Drafthouse Cinema in my backyard with Oblivion, and had a fun afternoon. And after three deadly serious movies the past couple weeks, I was ready for light fare. But Oblivion is not great nor memorable.

 

[DaveF]

I understood the sucking of oceans - draining water for "fusion power". I thought it was implied they were actually draining the oceans by the many beached ships and tankers Jack Harper rode between on his motorbike. I didn't understand why the moon was attacked and fractured. That seems unrelated to the story of Tet coming to earth, invading with a army of cloned Harpers, and sucking the oceans dried. Did I miss a line of dialog?Now, I need to get off the forums and get ready for the day, or my wife will report that we're not an "effective team"

 

[Tino]

Quote:with Tom Cruise given the only speaking role, and his half-age female eye candy required to be seen but not heard.Huh?? I count at least 5 other speaking roles.

 

[DaveF]

Mild hyperbole.Vicca and Jane were very subordinate roles. Vicca had noticeably less dialog. Jane had almost no dialog, and mostly physically reacted to Cruise's lines.

 

[Tino]

Perhaps, but to say Tom Cruise had the only speaking role is inaccurate.

 

[TonyD]

Saw it o IMAX last week,and trout it was great.4/5 stars.Tom Cruise did what he does best and play a great action character.I was reminded of Galactus from Fantstic Four as to what the giant cube like object was, a planet eater of sorts.For that line referred to spoken early in the movie I thought of something else and that didn't pan out And didn't think about what actually happened until that extra character appeared. And as we first saw him I leaned to my wife and told her what would happen and it did.I also got a little bit of a Planet of the Apes vibe because of the forbidden zone thing. Can't remember which Apes movie that was though.I know Dave was being facetious but there were plenty of speaking parts besides Cruise's.

 

[Malcolm R]

I understood the sucking of oceans - draining water for "fusion power". I thought it was implied they were actually draining the oceans by the many beached ships and tankers Jack Harper rode between on his motorbike.

I assumed they were pushed inland by the tsunamis resulting from the moon's destruction. Though Jack is shown to be in the New York City region, so they wouldn't have to be pushed too far. I wasn't sure if NYC was buried in sand/silt by the tsunamis or if Manhattan island sank, since the Empire State Building was buried all the way to the observation deck.

What I didn't understand was why the deception with sending needed parts to repair the drones and all the supposed tension with the drones breaking down and creating holes in the overall security of the sector? Obviously the Tet could send all the drone parts needed, or even whole armies of additional drones. Are we supposed to think Jack would have been suspicious if all the parts they requested were always delivered on demand?

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Finally caught up with this one via Redboxed Blu-Ray. Not as good as I was hoping, but better than a lot of the people I know made it out to be. The action scenes felt pretty perfunctory; I liked it better when it was focused on the science fiction. Saw the big twist of who the scavengers are and who the bad guy is coming a mile away. The movie completely surprised me with the reveal that ALL of the humans working for the aliens were Tom Cruise and Andrea Riseborough.The bait and switch with the Bond girl and Morgan Freeman I also saw coming.I was glad Julia's baby was fathered by Jack 49, since he's the one who saved the planet. Also glad that Julia got a Jack of her own to live out her days with.One thing that struck me: a suspiciously large percentage of the human genome going forward is going to be Tom Cruise's, since there are probably a ton of other Jacks scattered across the globe that are going to meet others and procreate. Probably the same is also true of all the Victorias, if they ever muster up the courage to leave their little towers.

 

[Yee-Ming]

Also just watched this on BD. Pretty good, but as someone has already pointed out, Cruise rarely makes a bad movie.

A few nitpicks: when Beech (Morgan Freeman) had captured Jack 49 and was being questioned by his #2 "Jamie Lannister" (can't remember the character's name) as to why he thought Jack was different, he answered saying something along the lines of "she says so", or "she thinks so", implying Julia had given her stamp of approval. Up till then we had been sold the idea that the "Scavs" had something to do with bringing the Odyssey down (which they did), and that the "Scavs" could be in league with the Odyssey crew, hence Julia, having been in contact for a while with Jack 49, could be the one giving her approval. But later on it is clear that Julia would not have known Beech and his group at all. That being the case, who is the "she" that Beech referred to? There are no other notable female characters (it obviously couldn't have been Vicca).

Also, there did not appear to have been any opportunity for Jack 49 to have fathered a child with Julia, but I suppose it is implied. (I initially just thought she had settled down with someone else, or adopted a child.)

I suppose there is going to be a fair bit of Jack & Victoria DNA in the human genome, but on the other hand it isn't clear just how many human survivors there are left on Earth running around. Beech's group is just one that happened to be in Jack 49's territory, presumably there are going to be others. As an aside, that suicide mission to detonate the bomb clearly referenced Armageddon... and when Jack 49 ducked under a waterfall to evade drones, I thought of one of the Matrix sequels...

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Also just watched this on BD. Pretty good, but as someone has already pointed out, Cruise rarely makes a bad movie.

A few nitpicks: when Beech (Morgan Freeman) had captured Jack 49 and was being questioned by his #2 "Jamie Lannister" (can't remember the character's name) as to why he thought Jack was different, he answered saying something along the lines of "she says so", or "she thinks so", implying Julia had given her stamp of approval. Up till then we had been sold the idea that the "Scavs" had something to do with bringing the Odyssey down (which they did), and that the "Scavs" could be in league with the Odyssey crew, hence Julia, having been in contact for a while with Jack 49, could be the one giving her approval. But later on it is clear that Julia would not have known Beech and his group at all. That being the case, who is the "she" that Beech referred to? There are no other notable female characters (it obviously couldn't have been Vicca).

I think it was more of a matter of reputation; she knew the "real" Jack better than any one, so she'd be a credible judge.

Also, there did not appear to have been any opportunity for Jack 49 to have fathered a child with Julia, but I suppose it is implied. (I initially just thought she had settled down with someone else, or adopted a child.)

After Jack healed Julia in the cave with the tech from Tower 52, Julia and Jack 49 slept together at his valley retreat. Before rejoining the resistance.The other possibility is that she was already pregnant when she was put into delta sleep, and her daughter is the daughter of the "real" Jack. But given that Jack 49 sacrifices everything at the end, I like to think that it's his baby from that one magical night in the valley retreat.

 

[Yee-Ming]

I think it was more of a matter of reputation; she knew the "real" Jack better than any one, so she'd be a credible judge.


After Jack healed Julia in the cave with the tech from Tower 52, Julia and Jack 49 slept together at his valley retreat. Before rejoining the resistance.The other possibility is that she was already pregnant when she was put into delta sleep, and her daughter is the daughter of the "real" Jack. But given that Jack 49 sacrifices everything at the end, I like to think that it's his baby from that one magical night in the valley retreat.

Not sure I can see that being relevant (Julia knowing original Jack better than anyone else) -- Beech obviously knows Jack 49 is a clone, since he (sort of) sends him to encounter Jack 52, and must therefore previously have encountered Jack 52, or indeed maybe a few others. That being the case, when Beech feels he can 'turn' or persuade Jack 49 to their cause, it is something about Jack 49 in particular, which he did confirm when he noted that Jack 49 had found an old book and kept it.

Point taken about Jack 49 and Julia having had one night together at his cottage; I guess I had just assumed that being injured, she was recovering and didn't 'get it on' so had overlooked that. I had also thought about the possibility she was pregnant on her mission, but surely she would have been taken off the crew had she been pregnant, so I discounted that as well.