Well? is he right?

well? is he right?

Other urls found in this thread:

newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/scott-whitlock/2017/09/23/director-hollywood-bomb-blames-americans-rejecting-science-flop
m.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c
twitter.com/AnonBabble

duuuuuuu science hard

notice how all his language is religious, but hes replacing God with science, he even uses the word believe, believing in science!

Yeah, surely it's not his fault for writing a shit movie

They scrapped a Friday the 13th for this.

Did Aronofsky lost his mind or he's just being a attention whore?

Didn't it get booed in Venice, too?

Maybe. Juuuuust maybe it was a poorly acted, shitty film.

Lmao, what a fag

Europe thought it was shit too and they are all godless homosexuals.

Wasn't there already a reboot?

>movie is a religious allegory, a retelling of genesis with cypher characters representing god and and mother earth
>it flopped because people "don't believe in sciene"

>October 13th is a Friday this year
>renewed interest in the IP due to the game being successful
>haven't had a good slasher movie in years
>Paramount needs to make a film soon or the IP will revert back to New Line

Is Paramount retarded?

>the responsibility lies with someone else lol
typical

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

>dude God is evil lmao
>dude humans are evil lmao

>humans who believe in God don't want to see the movie

how could this have flopped???

I dont get it, the film is all just a big allegory for the bible. Its critical of Christianity, but I wouldn't say that it had a particularly pro-science message or theme.

Yeah, in 2009. A F13 movie would basically be guaranteed profit right now with a hard R-rating and some nostalgia pandering.

>movie is shit
>blames audience
fucking retard

this, who is the audience for this film supposed to be?

atheists don't want to see a retelling of the bible

believers don't want to see their religion get trashed

enviromental nazis don't need any more convincing

umm atheism isnt a religion sweetie

Idiot philistine.

Lawrence's character acts as Gaia and the Virgin Mary, so it's not an allegory, it's a deconstruction of Christianity that replaces the masculine sanctity of the rebellious son (Christ) with the feminine sanctity of the mother (Mary, Earth, etc.) Aronofsky is a religious ecologist and this is why he gets so defensive about his heaven-storming, and why he worships science.

Partially. He's right about americans being extremely dumb about science, with some welcome exceptions, but he's entirely wrong on why his film was hated.

Is this the hip new image going around? Laterally everywhere, almost aa if it was handed out to organized shills.

He did a movie about magic jewish math, kabbalah, noah and now god again

what is he talking about

I'm glad it bombed. That guy thinks with his dick. He cast JLaw just so he could fuck her despite her having zero acting skills.

in a way, "science" is the new age religion of the 21st century

"science" is god
scientists are its prophets
media are the priests

the scientists are never wrong, if you disagree with them you hate science

if a scientist goes against the other scientists and suggests any god except science, they are excommunicated

I'm not saying that science is bad, but I'm saying it's going through a sort of deification thanks to millenials who FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE

This makes me feel bad, I guess I'll have to go see the movie out of guilt, lol, fuck you jerk-offsky.

Brainlet wojak
opposite of smart wojak

Hmmmm

his obsession with religion despite hating it reminds me of yuros obsessing over america despite hating it

why are inferior people always so buttmad

kinosseurs

Eh, I wouldn't say this is exactly an accurate account. Most scientists don't believe in "scientism," in the sense that to be a skillful scientist you have to recognize the necessary flaws in your observational metric. The people who usually worship science are atheistic humanists who actually know jack shit about how to conduct a valid experiment. Or, if they do know anything, it consists in parroting the "scientific method."

uuuhhh... fuck science and fuck brown people

hail maga!

He doesn't seem to make it entirely out of hate.

He seems to keep some respect for old jewish stuff while attempting some liberal reimaginings of shit other people would share with the old testament (noah)

All the while he makes movies referencing a bronze age cult.

Because it's a film full of science.

I know, i was pretending to be retarded.
These people always seem t forget that science is fallible and what was once fact can be falsified. This isnt to mean that all science is wrong, just that taking it 100% without the notion that it may not be accurate is very foolish.

mystical/ feminine shit = ok
dad stuff = bad

i fucking love science

>a film reviled by the American people

Is this Brightbart? I'm no "progressive" but that kind of jingoistic writing style gives me the creeps.

"Believing" in science? Truly 89IQ.

Yes, it is.

All I've heard about this movie is that it's extremely unpleasant, like its whole deal is challenging the audience. Did he really expect to go full disturbing avant-garde and have it sell tickets?

>Is Paramount retarded?
Yes

>Watch mother!
>Huh, well it was at least kinda unique, pretty hanfisted but maybe it's more just a commentary on man as opposed to some 'hurr fuck god bible bad' thing with at least a bit up to interpretation
>see all of his comments explicitly explaining every metaphor and now flat out saying it's a science trumps belief film, thus eradicating the absolute last bit of possible interpretation the film could have
Fucking Guardians of the Galaxy left more things open for interpretation than this once he had his way with it
What the fuck happened to him, he used to at least have a little bit of subtlety

What the fuck does "Believe in Science" even mean? Science is tool. Thats all. I suspect what they are trying to say is "accept what we deam as truth through current concesus of Scientists in X field but only when we deam it relevant." Disingenuous appeal to authroity that is ironically unscientific.

It's called Gnosticism you dullards.

what, he's into some sophia x demiurge nonsense?

>mrw

>tfw to smart to make a good movie

newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/scott-whitlock/2017/09/23/director-hollywood-bomb-blames-americans-rejecting-science-flop
>exposing and combating liberal media bias
you were spot on user well deduced

yes because lecturing or dismissing people will totally make them see your arty farty movie

I reject this film as an American and I don't give a shit about science in movies.

>movie bombs
>blames the evangelicals who never would have seen it anyways

Also Darren you fucking hack, in the Christian religion Jesus died willingly and knowingly, he wasn't some baby eaten by psychopaths.

saw an ad for it the other day

>some critics loved mother
>others, not so much
>find out for yourself!

it's probably not jesus bro

why are american christians incredibly sensitive towards violence and gore when the bible is one of the goriest books around?

yeah, we should all be like the lead actress and believe that hurricanes are scientifically proven to be mother nature's vengeance for election results, also earthquakes are how mother nature tells mexicans they should hop the border

It's abstract, the bible isn't a picture book, I know liberals can't understand concepts without pictures.

Do you also think The Passion of the Christ bombed you fat fedora chewer?

so christians are ok with vivid descriptions of gore when it's in written form, but not when it's depicted visually? cool bunch.

exactly, they're ok with the gore in the passion of the christ, but another movie that has gore in it is suddenly appaling and offensive, because it doesn't glorify their faith?

also notice how I said american christians as a european christian.

What European Christians? Poland? Go suck nigger feet you larping faggot.

No, no, no, no, no. You have it backwards, they're fine with violence and gore, it's nudity and sexuality that makes their heads spin.

irish. congratulations on managing to mention blacks and feet in a single post, Sup Forums would be proud. next time try and squeeze in some pedophilia in there as well.

violence in the bible isn't for entertainment

Americans are generally fine with violence though. Its sexuality that will raise eyebrows, yet we are still more relaxed about sexuality in the media than most of the world is.

Why not both?

There are more than plenty of those already.

But atheists are superior from virtually every relevant metric, from IQ and education, to wealth and quality of life

science isn't science anymore either

>50 million genders
>not allowed to state facts that all people are not equal in terms of intelligence or psychological makeup

That is another issue, had the allegory been somewhat accurate of Darren's beliefs mother would have been devoured instead, herself being a representation of nature/earth. What did the baby even represent?

most of the criticism I've read about mother! from christians and conservatives condemn the gore.

and it isn't necessarily for entertainment here. christians aren't the arbitrators of what is and isn't educational, not that education and entertainment are mutually exclusive.

Good grief, is that what this shit is?

It's really funny to me that his star is one very prominent recent denier of science - her comment about the hurricanes being nature's retaliation against America for electing Trump was Jerry Falwell-tier foulness.

No, again, they don't think like this, please stop making us look cretinous.

Gender studies isn't science

>gore expresses the suffering of a man who according to the religious beliefs had to suffer for humanity
>gore expresses the depravity-
wait no, this is a science flick
>gore expresses the uncaring hunger of humanity
wait, how is this science related again?

There's only really one instance of gore in Mother!, and that's to do with the baby scene. So I'd wager a guess the fact that it was the dismemberment of an infant + cannibalism that set people off. But gore in general isn't a real problem with Americans.

So what I'm gathering is that Darren Aronofsky decided to make a Lars von Trier-style "mistreat a woman for two hours to illustrate a boil-in-the-bag allegory that means nothing" movie, but he's such a douche of a Nimrod that even that level of Shylockery is beyond his grasp?

but bill nye told me otherwise?

>Lars von Trier-style "mistreat a woman for two hours to illustrate a boil-in-the-bag allegory
shit id forgotten about that already

fuck at least there it was loosely based on a Beckett thing about a pirate's daughter

Only brainlets get their scientific education from popsci shows

Only dummies hate my mo*burp* movie morty... only dumb people hate it haha

Director cant even make a proper sentence do defend his trash, blames rejecting science for it.

...

>he used to at least have a little bit of subtlety

I think it was Brecht in that case, but to be honest I was thinking of several of his films. I mean, pretty much all of them that I'm aware of. That's the most obvious one because it's the most DDUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH!!

yeah him, brainfart

is this guy the anti zack snyder

How fucking hilarious. Can't I just hate his movie(and possibly him too now) just for not being anywhere near as smart and profound as he clearly thought it was?

>What the fuck happened to him, he used to at least have a little bit of subtlety

Only until his first seven-figure budget. And Pi has aged badly because it's so transparently taken from other movies that preexisted it, and its takeaway - that stupidity is desirable and preferable to understanding - is depressingly indicative of his ouevre as it's developed. Why does a man who hates ideas spend so much time referencing the idea of thinking? Why doesn't he just make a bunch of movies of Mickey Rourke looking rueful? That was the best thing he ever did, he had a protagonist who was his intellectual equal for once.

He's a kike you fool, it's not a meme they hate the goyim and especially hate Christianity

So it's like Rick and Morty but somehow even dumber AND alienated normies? Outrageous.

>muh secret knowledge
>it was real in my mind
Were gnostics the original "holocaust survivors"?

>Jews reusing the same trick they used with "scientific socialism"

Carlin said it better, twenty years earlier and with substantially less auto-fellatio.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c

THE (((SCIENCE))) IS SETTLED.

>There's only really one instance of gore in Mother!

Oh, I'd say there was Gore all over this shitfest.

t. only guy on this whole site who actually understood the movie

Provably false. I got every last thing going on, from the Biblical allegory to the Gaia element, to the arguably unintentional autobiographical elements. I hated it for talking down to the audience, belaboring its points, and tripping over its own metaphors.

A real scientist is sceptical.
That's one thing people projecting religion onto science always forget.
Environmentalism and its politics do have a belief/religious undertone to them.