Jump to content

kalvasflam

Members
  • Content Count

    1,713
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

35 Excellent

About kalvasflam

  • Rank
    Pineapple Eater

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

4,683 profile views
  1. Oh man, now we're moving from the B-team to the C-team. Seriously, Moonkinght? She Hulk? What's next, US Agent? Hercules? I am seriously worried that Disney is burning through the Marvel characters too fast. They need to slow down and really milk these things. Set up an Iron Man series, the five years in between the Snap and Endgame. You can stick in marrying Potts (GP gets to milk more money) Evans need to come back and do more therapy sessions for the in-between period. Then, there is Rhodes and Rocket. Or the Nebula and Rocket show. We can have moody Hawkeye dishing out his brand of justice. Toss in Ms Marvel occasionally. The Asgardians, how Valkyrie had to deal with Thor as he got fatter. Don't forget the transition from Bruce to smart Hulk transition. Am I missing anyone? Seriously, at this rate, Marvel is going to get boring in another five or six years if all we get is B-team and C-teams.
  2. It is a very interesting paint job. I am still waiting for the hot pink SU-34 with Taylor Swift images plastered all over it. Hahaha.
  3. Ha, that’s because the songs in the soundtrack all comes from the 80s. Appropriate for the period piece. That was a fairly entertaining movie all things considered.
  4. I don't care about the skin color of Bond, but going over to a female Bond is just ridiculous. If they want to make a womanizing female Bond, there is actually a title for that one, it's called Atomic Blonde, and I found that very entertaining. And it was relatively original for Hollywood (since they at least adapted it from a book) As for gay Bond, remember, there was talk some years ago about that, right between the second and the third DC Bond I think. Then they threw in the innuendo in the third DC Bond film, but at least that was done in a reasonable fashion, because it felt like psychological warfare, rather than to deliberate forced focus on sex. Heck, if they wanted to do that, they could've had Bond oggling Q, or M (Ralph Finnes, not Judy Dench). But then, you'd just have the equivalent of Kevin Spacey in MI6.
  5. So, this is DC's last outing. Great. Hope it goes out on a high note. I rebel at the thought of James Bond not being a womanizing white dude. I'm sorry, stop trying to change the character of Bond to suit the modern sensibility, it's like the idea of gay Bond, or trans Bond, or animal fetish Bond, it just doesn't fit the character, if Hollywood wants to do one of those movies, go ahead, just don't use the Bond name. Were they going to call this new one, the transgender Bond? Or the sensitive Bond? Just to broaden their reach. Hello Bond, glad to see you got your balls cut off, I suppose at least that the rope to the balls trick won't work any more.... was that what you were thinking too?
  6. The problem with the SU57 is that it looks like they took the Flanker and mashed it together with an F-22. It's interesting, ever since the advent of the Raptor, every stealth fighter (concept or production) looks like it. It is as if all the engineering thoughts and efforts behind stealth aircraft have gone away. It is either an F-22 form factor for a fighter, or a flying wing form factor for a bomber. What happened to the innovators out there? Can someone at the old MCD or Northrop please knock off LMC as the sole producer of stealth fighters.... I'm starting to get sick of the same generic form factors.
  7. Yeah, it's a utter tragedy what limits they slapped onto JMS around B5. You can tell from the first few seasons, his story telling was great, even though there were some filler episodes. But then the restraints they put on him, and with what Scifi did, it was just tragic, how the suits mangled a fantastically fun universe.
  8. I agree... it should be someone who has worked on the franchise for a while, not someone who wants to make a name for himself. I'm not sure if offered, the Russo brothers would take it. Who knows, perhaps Johnson will make it something epic and really do a fantastic expansion on the SW universe. A full movie with zero reference to the Force would be interesting.
  9. seem to recall in TPM , it was damage to the hyperdrive, and they needed some parts, which is why hippie Jinn went off to barter for parts.
  10. The resistance died and lived because of very idiotically contrived plot points. Lived: because the FO just couldn't launch swarms of thousands of Ties to swamp and kill the few pitiful ships left. Yet somehow, oddly, Kylo managed to do it. No, let's drag this f'ing thing out with a boring chase till there is no fuel. Oh, and by the way, why call Ren back? Cause that bad boy, asides from not killing his mother, could've survived out there indefinitely. Died: because... aside from all of the reasons mentioned above, they are also hampered by the fact that they suddenly had only fuel left for one jump, and their own stupidity. Seriously, have you guys ever heard of splitting up your forces, you had like four ships, just go in four different directions. Yes, I'm sure there is some contrived reason why the splitting of forces wouldn't work, but fuel for massive starships had never been a problem until this movie, so this either meant Leia or her underlings were incompetent, or yet another contrived reason to have a little drama.
  11. TPM was a start of the prequels, and I didn't think it was blatantly as bad, the whole prequels can be summed up in terms of just overall expectations, I think people expected way too much from their childhood favorite and when it didn't meet expectations, fans started picking up faults with it. Whether or not people thought of the portrayals of Gungans and the Trade Federations as caricatures was perhaps more a matter of sensitivity. To me, Jar Jar was just a pointless exercise in trying to be cute. Comedic relief that didn't really fill the part. TFA was certainly entertaining enough, I know people didn't like it because it was too much a carbon copy of Ep IV, but so what? JJ was trying to pull in nostalgia. You could argue that he was trying to introduce the franchise to a new generation, and well, it worked out fine. TLJ however made it seem like they were deliberately tearing down the old characters to build up the new ones. Oh and when possible, older characters should try to not so much impart their wisdom but gets chastened by youth and enthusiasm. Honestly, it might have worked better if they just killed Luke rather than turn him cynical.
  12. Seto, I tend to think Rogue One was overlooked because the focus was more on the action, and the "familiar settings." It was certainly not the in your face style of work done in TLJ where literally they started incorporate all different types of themes that overshadowed the story, you could cut out half the movie, and the story would still flow. There is a right balance between subtlety and screaming crap in your face. Added to the fact that TLJ's focus on story and action was just so bad, it makes the movie not worth it. The Luke moment was so disappointing, the action so contrived and outside the norms set by other Star Wars movie, it made people question why the rebels just didn't build a bunch of cheap blockade runners run by droids and suicide them against star destroyers via hyperdrive and won the war that way. The problem was always there, but TLJ screamed it out loud in your face. TFA had some of the same problems with plot and consistency, but at least, there, you could see them trying to stick to lore in some respect. Disney and RJ tried to appeal to a wider audience beyond the base, and then they went to make the movie relateable to the masses, but they completely forgot that we go to the movies to escape from the day to day outrage culture and the barrage of crap we see in the news. If I want a story about inequality, racism, and female empowerment, I can turn on CNN, or surf the web, or watch a bunch of other films, I don't need to pay Sideshow Bob a fee for that. But in the end, it is still all about the audience, and what the writers and directors think about the perception of the audience. We'll see if the last one does anything to make right the steaming pile of crap called TLJ. As the old dude said, time to set things right.
  13. I think the overriding problem with Star Wars is its audience, or to be more precise, what the director and writer thinks his audience is like. Society in 1977 is far different than it is in 2017. So, the writer and then the director does their work according to what they think will drive that core audience. Primarily who they want the audience to be and what they think society will accept that will drive more revenue in the future of the franchise. Han's "I know" moment in ESB if it was done today would totally be unacceptable and viewed as chauvinism of the worst kind. No one would've batted an eye at Jar Jar in 1977, in 1999, Jar Jar was considered a racial caricature by the audience, while Lucas must've thought it was cute, and the technical marvels involved in doing such a CGI creature. Fast forward to TLJ, we end up with social justice as a noticeable part of the movie because it's now part of the progressive culture. And by the way, the people who writes and directs this stuff, sees the reaction from the past, and then gauges on how to change to script appropriately to satisfy what they think is the target audience. The problem is, catering to the young invariably piss off the older fans. When the younger generation don't take to the interpretation of the film, the whole thing becomes a steaming pile garbage. They should've probably left Lucas at the helm I think. It would've worked better, Lucas would've been at least some what consistent, even if he had to retcon Ep 1 to 6 all over again.
  14. You know, for the purpose of fan service, Rian could appear as an extra in the beginning of the movie, and get killed by both sides... insert whatever reason you want here. It would be a way of appeasing the fans,
  15. The way I read that, it is implied the F-18 E/F can actually carry heavier ordinance load while flying off the deck of a carrier, but I note that he didn't mention anything specific about range on the aircraft. Does that seem about right?
×
×
  • Create New...