Съездили в Кэмбридж, посмотрели на второй универский городок.

Фотографии можно посмотреть здесь - https://flic.kr/s/aHBqjD6Ehg

Солнечное затмение 2026 успешно просмотрено из Англии.

Повезло с погодой и видом из окна, поэтому получилось пофоткать даже не выходя из дома.

Ссылка на пост в инсте - https://www.instagram.com/p/Db-lYAtDAsZiNOZeBXpeY5mbGx_M1M638rjdoY0/?stkn=MXZxaG41eGN2c3RmZQ==

Мы переехали в Гилфорд из Лондона! У Скай начинается деревенская жизнь..

First off, let me say outright that, in my opinion, this is one of the best adaptations of The Odyssey (though my favorite remains "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" from 2000), despite the film's flaws -including those typical of Nolan.

I always felt that, considering how many Odyssey adaptations already exist, there was no point in adapting it literally again. Fortunately, Nolan managed to inject his own idea with minimal plot changes (or at least shifted the focus toward one of the book's core themes), which keeps the film feeling fresh.

Next will be a bit spoilers.

He somehow managed to adapt nearly all the episodes onto screen - a feat few have accomplished in such a runtime. Of course, he changed a lot, but for his particular vision, these were justified alterations.

As for the negatives, I think it's worth mentioning that Nolan repeats the same mistake he made in Oppenheimer, where he simply showed the protagonist staring in horror at a screen displaying footage of the atrocities his invention had caused - without showing the audience any of it. In other words, it's such a pathetic, worthless, and safe attempt to convey that "war is bad", while simultaneously trying not to actually frighten anyone. It even looks like he tries not to bump up the age rating, even though it is already R. That was honestly embarrassing to watch.

Here he does essentially the same thing, failing to show even the bare minimum of the horror that should have been taking place. Though in truth, there were easy ways to make certain things crystal clear to the audience even without gore or really scary stuff. But Nolan is apparently afraid to try.

The classic Nolan problems aren't really worth dissecting in detail - he hasn't improved anything in himself: women are still almost undeveloped characters, the pacing remains too fast, and the soundtrack (great in itself) still fails to register when a scene has changed.

On the lighter side - sorry, but when actors who couldn't look less Greek proudly stare into the camera saying "we are Greeks!" in an ancient setting, it can only provoke awkward laughter. It's rather hypocritical and dumb. But it’s not that big of a deal - only couple of scenes, just funny.

Also worth noting: while in almost all Odyssey adaptations Odysseus is portrayed as a sweetheart, desperately missing Penelope, etc., in the original he actually slept with pretty much every woman on his way. People seem too awkward to bring that up. Though yes, I agree that in this film it would have been completely out of place and would have broken the central idea, so I'm not complaining.

But in any case, these grievances of mine don't outweigh the film's merits - it's still a great adaptation. With its own reinterpretations, but very good ones nonetheless. I just wanted to grumble a bit.

To be honest, instead of the last two films, I'd rather watch 6 hours of Tom Cruise running endlessly with epic music.

Funny anti-advertisement of Snickers

I didn't expect to rewatch Interstellar today, lol. No, seriously, you can compare frame by frame these movies periodically. And I'm not just talking about the visuals, but also about the attempt to copy the soundtrack and camera work. It's weird, I don't know how I feel about it.

The idea of transferring your dreams to the screen is very interesting and overall the film more or less manages to do it, but in my opinion it would be much more interesting if we were shown dreams closer to how we actually see them when we sleep - less structure, more sudden changes of locations/characters, more surrealism. For example, we can remember how Tarkovsky deals with memories in "Mirror" or Andrei Bely with his attempt to transfer the perception of a baby in "Kotik Letaev".

Paul ate too much Spice, I guess...

Why?

I was more worried about Frodo than I was while watching Lord of the Rings

These holy cigarette butts are quite impressive!

With the same logic, a sequel to "The Passion of the Christ" could have been made.

Looks like they forgot to add shitty VHS quality

В прошлом году я решил получить странную ачивку и если и не побывать во всех странах мира, то хотя бы посмотреть фильмы оттуда.

Для этого я решил во первых смотреть в основном только те фильмы, где в странах производства фигурирует исключительно интересующая меня страна (потому что, например, в Африке до сих пор чувствуется колониальное прошлое и не очень хорошее влияние Европы)

и во вторых из каждой страны посмотреть хотя бы по 5 таких фильмов (если столько существует). Найти их было не очень просто, но всё таки получилось.

Как бы это странно не звучало, но скорее всего теперь я буду скучать по этим милым любительским (дурацким, но душевным) фильмам от трёх-четырёх друзей африканцев.

Since I'm a fan of both the book and the director, I was bound to like the movie. Moreover, the first film turned out exactly the way I wanted.

As always, Villeneuve's film has perfect cinematography and soundtrack for my tastes, beautiful scenery, grandiose shots and almost the entire film can be disassembled into screenshots.

I hear from many that the second film is stronger than the first. I can't comment too much because I don't agree with most of the complaints about the first film. But yes, in this film there is a much better sense of the oppressive danger and fate of the coming of the "Messiah", which is perfectly emphasized by the cinematography and sound work.

Subjectively for me the film is five stars out of five. I'm adding it to my favorites list.

An epic story about an almost hopeless war between good and evil, friendship, love, self-sacrifice, courage and hope. The films from this trilogy are incredibly beautifully shot, with excellent cinematography that perfectly shows the majesty of the landscapes of New Zealand and the cities of "Middle-earth", excellent actors and a masterpiece soundtrack that perfectly conveys the mood of the moment, complements the events in the films and tells the emotions and thoughts of the characters.

The films show that there is always hope. Even when there is impenetrable darkness all around and you can't believe that it will dissipate. Every time I watch this trilogy, I notice more and more interesting details in both the picture and the music.

Fans of the books often criticize the film adaptation for controversial changes. Yes, they exist, and in some places they are quite critical indeed. But I would advise not to compare with the book, but just enjoy the wonderful films, they are worth it.

"Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn't. They kept going. Because they were holding on to something. - What are we holding onto, Sam? - That there's some good in this world, Mr. Frodo… and it's worth fighting for."

Ridley Scott made his own "Rashomon" - with knights and duels! Dark story with three different points of view that interestingly show the characters' personalities.

The main thing is not to ask Ridley Scott how historical this film is, because he doesn't like this question...

Wes Anderson gathered all the stars and once again made automatically one of the most beautiful films of that year!

The film consists of several separate stories and they may not seem particularly exciting, but who cares. After all, what beautiful films he makes!