Jump to content

Dynaman

Members
  • Posts

    4546
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dynaman

  1. OK you win, live action shows with lots of space battles are economically feasable. Studios have been shoveling out Cop shows, Doctor shows, Lawyer Shows, Reality TV shows, etc... just to spite us.
  2. Way too early for that, but I will have it the day it is released. For now going back to see it in Imax will have to do.
  3. I'll ditto the "looks better then I thought" theme. Luckily this movie comes out a week before my 21st anniversery (wife's too). Now we have a date planned.
  4. A basic cable Disney channel. I guess that makes it the 53rd basic channel...
  5. There is a reason why there have been so few "space fighters" sci fi shows, and budget is that reason. (and the second, third, and fourth reasons too).
  6. Two possible reasons, one good and one bad. Bad - they plan on a kiddie show. Good - It would be way too expensive to do as live action.
  7. I don't think so, at least not with the movie we got - the background felt so "different" between Pitch Black and Chronicles. It was hard to believe the two movies took place in the same universe. Unlike Alien/Aliens (which did make the leap from Horror to Action).
  8. Sounds interesting. I hope Disney put in place an over-arching continuity for the new films and the cartoon to live in. It would be nice not to have the movies invalidate everything in the toon.
  9. My wife hates 3D, and I HATE when it looks dodgy. Is the 3D on Imax decent looking, as in not darkening the scenes too much and not muddying up the picture? (last movie shot in 2D and shown in 3D I saw was Clash of the Titans and the 3D process was a muddled mess in that one)
  10. Not really, I have no intention of ever reading the Bond books, may be heresy to some but I don't care. Anyway, picking the perfect Bond is like choosing the best Doctor Who.
  11. Well, you can't blame Craig for the writing, or the innuendo. Writers are the cause of those ills. As for new guy to burnt out, the first movie was Craig had him as the new guy, this one was released 6 years later and the actor has aged, even though we have only seen 3 total movies in that time a "real" person in that amount of time doing that amount of crazy spy stuff would get burnt out. I think the main problem was that Craig looked too old to be "the new guy" back in 2006 to begin with. (he doesn't look old but he never had that fresh faced kid look)
  12. Saw it yesterday and loved it. Characters and plot and pacing were spot on. Plot holes, of course, but they didn't take me out of the flow of the movie. Wife and I are going to go see it in Imax next week. As for some of the complaints, some of the Trekkies really need to take Shatner's advice and "get a life!"
  13. I liked it too, it was a decent film (not great but decent). The problem was taking a little movie like Pitch Black and trying to turn it into a Tent Pole action adventure franchise movie.
  14. > I guess that I'm sad that they took some of the best material in the older movies, and twisted it around into an homage that would only make sense to the same people it'd piss off Not all of them by any stretch, there is a VERY vocal minority of fans of the old I must admit, but I've never actually met one in the flesh - every one of the old Trek crowd I'm with love the new movies. We also agree that Rodenberry was going off the deep end - early TNG was terrible and it didn't get better till Rodenberry was basically muscled aside. Trek 2 is another example of that in action.
  15. Yes, the Nuclear program in Germany was never anywhere near making an Abomb. The US and Britain already had working jet aircraft as well, Britain used theirs to knock V-1s out of the sky while the US one was only just going through trials at the end of the war. While neither was as advanced as the 262 that could have been rectified fairly quickly. The US plane in particular was a rush job being designed and built in under 6 months or something, the thing it was really missing was the swept wing design of the 262 (same for the UK plane, it took longer to design and build - the UK was far ahead of most other countries in jet technology before the war but funding lagged during the war)
  16. Friend at work saw it and loved it. I'll be seeing it Sunday (hate crowds) and will most likely love it too.
  17. He got an Oscar nod for 9th Company, they are REALLY lowering standards then. Cliched, predictable, and terribly overwrought that film was. That said I still enjoyed the film and look forward to seeing this one. Enemy at the Gates was a decent movie, not very realistic, but decent. The German Stalingrad movie had too much of that "we are REALLY REALLY sorry for WWII but our troops suffered too..." vibe to it.
  18. Why? They could always kill him again...
  19. And you would have been fired that instant too. It was a photo shoot for a TV show featuring an actress who most likely NEVER held a gun other then on set (and most likely the one she is holding is a prop and not a real one with a firing pin, etc...). If you feel the need to slap someone it would be the weapons master on the set and not the actress (once again, only if that was a real gun weather loaded or not, rather then a very realistic prop)
  20. I wouldn't know the reference, I've not watched any of the Resident Evil movies or played the games.
  21. That one trailer was in English, is a US release planned for this film in theaters? Anyone know when if that is true? Or the DVD release date.
  22. OK, 10 minutes of things going boom followed by 1.5 to 2 hours of a couple people floating around in space? Pass.
×
×
  • Create New...