• otacon239@lemmy.worldEnglish
    281·
    30 days ago

    I always love it when people refer to “this ending” or “this scene” as if everyone is supposed to know what this blurry still is supposed to be from. Even if it was a video, that still doesn’t tell me what it’s from.

    Edit: to all the haters…

    Saying ‘what kind of an idiot doesn’t know about the Yellowstone supervolcano’ is so much more boring than telling someone about the Yellowstone supervolcano for the first time.

      • b34k@lemmy.worldEnglish
        39·
        30 days ago

        I had no idea what I was looking at, then you writing this instantly made me realize the scene.

        So yeah, I think the commenter’s got a point

      • tremEnglish
        5·
        30 days ago

        Damn, I had a feeling, it was Titanic, because of the eerie lighting, but I’ve never watched it, never seen this scene.

        I guess, it did narrow things down, though, that it’s posted here without explanation…

      • django@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        3·
        29 days ago

        I tried watching it three times and fell asleep every time. I’ve come to the conclusion, that it is a very boring movie.

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      15·
      30 days ago

      Its ok, there can be cultural references you do not immediately understand, we don’t have to all have the exact same repetoire of concepts in our brains.

    • Jaycifer@piefed.socialEnglish
      13·
      30 days ago

      I have never watched the movie, don’t know that I’ve ever seen an image from this scene, but instantly recognized it because I’ve read people complain about it so many times online.

      • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyzBannedEnglish
        19·
        30 days ago

        Calling someone expressing their lack of omniscience “making cultural blindness their only personality trait” is a wild leap.

        • GeneralEmergency@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          27 days ago

          It’s bloody Titanic.

          If you never heard it seen anything about it.

          You’re either the perfect shut in that doesn’t leave the house or interact with anyone or anything. Or lying through your teeth to make yourself look cool and hipster to random internet strangers.

          It’s been talked about online, referenced in other media.

          I know the average Lemmite makes being a contrarian their only personality trait.

          • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyzBannedEnglish
            1·
            27 days ago

            Or… and here me out… maybe not everyone has a photographic memory for every scene in every movie that they’ve ever seen going back twenty years…

            Or maybe someone just isn’t a cinemaphile and doesn’t watch every movie that receives hype.

            And just because you’ve heard people talking about a movie doesn’t mean you can automatically identify every fucking still frame and synopsis point from that movie.

            You’re the one being contrarian. Also, apparently according to you the average lemming has at least two "only personality trait"s. Do you know what that phrase even means? Is it your only comeback? Are you a bot, or just not very creative?

            • GeneralEmergency@lemmy.worldEnglish
              2·
              26 days ago

              that receives hype

              If Titanic was some low budget indy film, that would be a fair complaint.

              But when it’s one of the biggest films of all time.

              Constantly referenced, in the popular zeitgeist for years. Changed movie going for years. If this was Crank 2, sure I would be perfectly ok with someone not knowing. But it’s not.

              This isn’t about having a photographic memory for every scene and plot point. (Although if you think you need that to remember the media you’ve watched. Yikes, hate to be you)

              At a certain point it changes from “I haven’t watched this so I don’t know” to “I am deliberately going out of my way to pretend to not know anything about this”

              That’s being a contrarian, that’s being culturally blind, that’s trying to be a hipster and proud of it.

              • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyzBannedEnglish
                1·
                26 days ago

                If Titanic was some low budget indy film, that would be a fair complaint.

                So because it had a high budget and was produced by a big-name studio, that somehow obligates everyone on the internet to have seen it?

                Constantly referenced, in the popular zeitgeist for years. Changed movie going for years.

                In other words, hype.

                This isn’t about having a photographic memory for every scene and plot point. (Although if you think you need that to remember the media you’ve watched. Yikes, hate to be you)

                It’s about recognizing one still frame from the end of the movie, and a vague description of what happened in that scene. You’re doing mental gymnastics to pretend otherwise.

                At a certain point it changes from “I haven’t watched this so I don’t know” to “I am deliberately going out of my way to pretend to not know anything about this”

                No, some people just haven’t seen it. Or some people saw it over a decade ago and don’t remember that seen. You’re just being a dick because it makes you feel superior.

                That’s being a contrarian, that’s being culturally blind, that’s trying to be a hipster and proud of it.

                You’re the one being contrarian and pretentious. Nobody is obligated to understand every media reference that you dictate is so famous that everyone should know.

                • GeneralEmergency@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  2·
                  25 days ago

                  Nobody is obligated to understand every media reference

                  The very post we are talking about explains the scene and doesn’t require knowledge of the film.

                  If comprehending the post itself is too much? Then you are deliberately going out of your way to make yourself culturally blind, and to be a contrarian to what’s popular culture.

                  don’t remember that seen

                  It’s the emotional payoff right at the end, not some random scene half way through. If you can’t remember the end of a film, yikes.

                  In other words, hype

                  In other words you’ve been going out of your way to avoid it because it’s popular and watching what’s popular would ruin your hipster identity.

    • toynbee@piefed.socialEnglish
      6·
      30 days ago

      Until coming to the comments, I thought it was from The Others, but that didn’t fit the title.

    • proleEnglish
      2·
      29 days ago

      For some reason I thought it was Wendy from Hook lol

    • wuffah@lemmy.worldEnglish
      28·
      30 days ago

      The 46 carat Hope Diamond on which the fictional Heart of the Ocean is based, is estimated at $200 - $300 million today.

      The white gold and zirconia prop used in the movie cost around $8,000 but if it were real at 56 carats, it would be valued at more than twice what the Hope Diamond is. Leave it up to Hollywood to invent fictional jewelry and then assign a value it.

      Although, since the diving vessel is directly on top of where the heavy metal necklace would conceivably fall, it might not take too long to locate it on the sea floor:

      The original search area for the Titanic was about 150 square miles, and the Titanic is only about 90 feet wide. So, for every Titanic width-sized object, you would need to search about 1.32 million positions.

      If the search area for the necklace were 1/4 square mile to allow for drift, and the necklace is effectively 4 inches wide, you would only need to search about 435,000 necklace-width positions. Although, being directly over the Titanic wreck could hamper metal detecting. It would be pretty ironic if the necklace fell back on to the deck of the wreck.

      So, suck on that ya old entitled bitch!

      • OwOarchist@pawb.socialEnglish
        12·
        30 days ago

        If the search area for the necklace were 1/4 square mile to allow for drift

        Your search area is perhaps a bit small.

        Where, exactly, was the ship she dropped it from at the exact moment she dropped it? Ships move around quite a bit, even when trying to maintain position over a wreck. And how precisely do you know when she dropped it?

        you would only need to search about 435,000 necklace-width positions.

        Only, huh? That’s still quite a lot when you’re talking about one of the most difficult places on the planet to get to. And because the necklace would likely sink straight into the soft ocean floor mud immediately upon impact, it’s likely not going to be just sitting there, easily found with a visual search. You will indeed need to use metal detecting.

        One issue with metal detecting: the main body of the ship only broke into two large parts, sure, but the entire area is going to be scattered with a debris field of small parts and junk. Pieces that broke off as the ship was breaking up, pieces that drifted away as the ship sank, pieces that broke off when it hit the bottom, pieces that were buoyant enough or interesting enough to sea creatures to drift away over the years of sitting at the bottom… You’re going to be getting a ton of false positives all over the place. A door hinge, a passenger’s pocketwatch, little scraps of broken-off plumbing pipe, a fork, hundreds of little scraps of hull plating…

        Searching through all of that will be extremely tedious (and expensive!), with no guarantee of eventual success. For all you know, a fish spotted the shiny, glinting thing as it sank and instinctively swallowed it, and now your multi-million dollar necklace is 50 miles away, giving some fish a stomachache.

        • wuffah@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          30 days ago

          All great points. Maybe there’s a metal detecting technology that can sniff specific types of metal? Or, some kind of density scan that could be tuned to the materials in the necklace?

          Ostensibly, they would be directly over the Titanic wreck because they were currently diving it, and the time the necklace was dropped as they were standing there when that old crone dropped it in front her middle-class daughter and the crew dedicating their professional lives to finding it. Estimations of the ocean currents and mockups of a necklace falling in seawater might tighten the search area.

          The real question is, how long could you comb a sea floor littered with Titanic debris before costs rose to more than the value of the necklace?

          By the way: RIP to Bill Paxton: Space Marine, Tornado Chaser, and Shipwreck Archeologist. May you find the Heart of the Ocean in your heavenly dreams. You are missed 😢

          When the lady you invited on your ship to find a necklace chucks it overboard:

      • Janx@piefed.socialEnglish
        4·
        30 days ago

        The white gold and zirconia prop used in the movie cost around $8,000 but if it were real at 56 carats, it would be valued at more than twice what the Hope Diamond is. Leave it up to Hollywood to invent fictional jewelry and then assign a value it.

        What does this mean? They had jewelers create a bespoke (non-diamond) necklace, but it had to be good quality because of the close-ups they wanted to do with it. As for “assigning it a value”, isn’t that just what people are willing to pay? $8,000 for a one-of-a-kind piece of jewelry and cinema history doesn’t seem too crazy to me…

        • wuffah@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          30 days ago

          The value of the prop used in the movie notwithstanding, a quick search suggested that a real 56 carat diamond with qualities and rarity similar to the Hope Diamond would be worth close to $600 million, but no such thing actually exists.

          So what I meant was: of course Hollywood has to come up with the ultimate jewel “worth more than the Hope Diamond”, to quote the movie.

  • Zorque@lemmy.worldEnglish
    13·
    30 days ago

    Their children and grandchildren … who are adults (and most probably already retirement age since she’s in her nineties) and if they need to rely on the questionable inheritance of a necklace they never even knew about they have more problems than a doddering old relative reliving her past glories.

    That’s the real indictment, that we have a system where people care more about their inheritance than their family.

    • SCmSTREnglish
      2·
      29 days ago

      Wow.

      It has been a long time since I’ve seen that. Holy hell.

      • Sludge@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        10·
        30 days ago

        No joke. I see my son and want nothing more than to provide a sense of security and a loving home. Maybe it will change over time but I can’t perceive viewing him as a “spoiled brat who should have nothing at my life’s end”

      • Fair Fairy@thelemmy.clubEnglish
        4·
        30 days ago

        Me no, but I can understand. After all - make your own damn money.
        Why shouldn’t they get a job?
        Some kids are so fucking entitled.

        • howrar@lemmy.caEnglish
          9·
          30 days ago

          We live in a capitalist society where you need to have money to make money. The less they start with, the less they’ll be able to make in expectation over their lifetime. Denying them an inheritance is basically saying that they should stay at the bottom of the totem pole.

            • howrar@lemmy.caEnglish
              3·
              30 days ago

              That should be accomplished through education. Then leave them money so they have the power to change things.

        • backalleycoyote@lemmy.todayEnglish
          5·
          30 days ago

          It’s attitudes like this that really make me enjoy when I can swindle, hustle, undercut, rob, and otherwise take advantage of people like you. I hope before you die you experience loss, suffering, misery, isolation, and the rejection of your children in your deepest hour of need.

      • NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        30 days ago

        There are a lot of super shitty adults that are actively someone’s child. I have two of them as siblings. Some people’s children are just shitty people and do just genuinely suck throughout their entire lives, not everyone is a saint worth giving any kind of fuck about. You can have a bad egg, it happens all the time.