Mr March

More to wet the already starving appetite

Hehehe, so many juciy pictures...right around the holidays. They know how to rope 'em in

I hear ya Graham. I'm happy to see that the fella running that website is still crediting me for my drawings.

Fantastic! I like that color scheme.

I beleive Christmas was originally a pagan celebration, so you're offending everyone equally...most progressive just kidding I'm looking forward to the opening of gifts for family and friends more than what I'm getting myself. I purchased several gifts this year that I KNOW they won't see coming, but I'm equally sure they are going to love the gifts. Not sure what I'm getting, but lots of consumable goodies, a few DVDs, and maybe something I'm not expecting would be great.

Weren't there some high end action figures that were very cool. I've got a copy of the original Armored Core Playstation game on the way and if I like it, I might consider buying some of the toys, but I'm looking for something bigger than the typical action figure sizes.

Even though I thought it one of the more artistic and authentic portrayals of the events leading up to Jesus's crucifixion, I guess I can undestand how someone looking for a film to entertain or compel them, or whatever it is films are supposed to do might find it lacking. Especially since the movie is somewhat predictable, and is constrained by Gibson's faithfulness (no pun intended) to the source material. And it's not like there were any surprises in store-- Jesus wasn't going to start shooting lasers out of His eyes at some point in the movie. So yeah, it worked for me, but I'm curious what makes it so unqualifiably poor to other folks. Could the subject matter even be done in a manner that would be considered undeniably good filmmaking, while remaining nearly verse-for-verse faithful to the Gospels, which obviously weren't originally written as screenplays? And could it ever work in the original language? Or maybe Gibson's enterprise simply couldn't succeed for some audiences. Anyway, I thought the anti-Semitism controversy silly, and I'm pretty undecided about the film's violence. The whipping scene constituted only some 10 minutes of the film, and I'm not sure its length added much beyond the stir it created, at least for me. I know that left the most lasting impression for some folks though. 354758[/snapback] You have to keep in mind this is just my personal opinion on the two films above. My like or dislike of the films is really just secondary to the point I was trying to make. I definitely don't have any ill will towards the people who like 9/11 or The Passion, just those people who label me based on my criticism. Very important distinction. I don't want to dwell too much on this tangent (if I'm derailing anything, please let me know Duke), but I am a firm believer that ANYTHING can be SUCCESSFULLY filmed. Skeptics say this can't be filmed or this isn't possible are simply admitting their own lack of imagination. I've heard detractors say the Naked Lunch could never be filmed or Lord of the Rings was impossible, and every decade of film history that passess proves them wrong again and again. The story of the Passion of the Christ is absolutely filmable...like anything else. In my opinion, Gibson's film was lacking. It had nothing to do with the violence (I've seen worse), being a non-beleiver (I have enjoyed religious/secular films of all kinds), or any other scapegoat people use as a crutch to dismiss criticism of a film they take so very seriously. If we aren't going too off topic, I'll post a more in-depth critique of why I disliked The Passion if you're interested. But rest assured, I've seen more film than most and I watch ALL film for ALL reasons, including entertainment, enlightenment, education, experience, and humility.

A bit cynical, but mostly accurate. Basically, you have to keep in mind that Hollywood is both an artistic industry and an investment industry. Directors and Producers make films for several reasons, not all of which are complimentary. Actors sometimes choose projects for mutually exclusive reasons as well. Why is is some of the more talented Directors/Actors will accept projects that are terrible on their face? Because visibility counts for much more than most of us think and not all kinds of movie viewers go to see all kinds of film. A director/actor known for critically acclaimed film often doesn't want to be known as just that. Some do, but most don't. The artsy films they make are intelligent, compelling, and generate respective profits. However, to become a popular culture legend, to be known like the names "Spielberg" or "De Niro" is known, a director/actor will often choose high profile, big box office projects simply to raise their profile...and correspondingly, their opportunities. Should the big projects fail, smaller, more dramatic and provocative filmmaking is often a return to form for many...and a return to respectability. But the visibility will still remain, good or bad.

Won't allow me to view the file, says I need to register and I won't be doing that.

I think after all of the uproar over The Passion (which, after seeing the movie [which wasn't very good], I found to be totally unfounded), I think its his way of moving past all of the craziness around that movie; poking a little fun at himself while having fun doing it. From everything I've heard he's a known praticaly joker, this seems to be his way of saying, "Hey, its just the same old me". 354521[/snapback] I hope you don't mind me going off on a bit of a tangent, but I just have to comment on a subject you touched with your last post. So much contraversy surrounds film releases now, it's turning into just another marketting scam to draw more crowds. Then people who disagree with the greatness of said contraversial film obviously have some ulterior motive. Perhaps the contraversial masterpiece these people so vehemently support just happens to (gasp) suck? The Passion of the Christ was a big steeming pile of pants Fahrenheit 9/11 was a big steeming pile of pants For my opinion, I've been accused of everything from a right wing, fundamentalist supporter of despotism and widening class gaps to a hateful atheist pagan, who's leftist mind is so bereft of morals I'm not qualified to criticize the multi-faceted genius of Gibson's film...this coming from people ignorant of film and who haven't been to a theatre in decades. It never occurs to people that they are simply supporting poor film and buying into contraversy that really doesn't exist. No political agendas, no ideological machinations, no ulterior motives...the film just sucks.

Fair enough. We're good. DVD release dates don't typically bother me all that much, since films usually are released quickly. I personally prefer DVD releases within 4-6 months after theatrical release. I was getting anxious over Sin City, which took 9 months for a proper DVD (theatres April 1st, DVD Recut-Extended December 13th) and Mr. and Mrs. Smith, which took 7 months (theatres June 10th, DVD December). Concurrent releases are the way to go in my mind, otherwise the studios have a tendancy to put off the special editions becuase the "already available" barebones DVD grants them a fan buffer. This situation also plays upon the impatience of waiting fans, fans who are often convinced to purchase a substandard DVD just to own the film until a full release is sold. Of course, this will all be a mute point if Soderbergh's new film is a hit, since it'll be available in theatres, pay-per-view, and DVD simultaenously. Could become the new model for film release, if it can succeed and survive the "old guard"

Friends are great, but women are better

I'd love nothing more than a better format. As much as I am an advocate for digital formats and true aspect ratio film releases, DVD is still not the ultimate format for film. Block noise, layer transition, and a few other flaws with DVD prevent my complete satisfaction. I won't truly be happy until an utterly flawless digital version of each film I love is available, and HD-DVD/Blu-Ray is a good step in the right direction. Hopefully, we can soon do away with physical discs. We should simply buy films as downloads or retail files that you can buy and go to the store to download into your own portable harddrive. It would be the ultimate space saver and is more enviromentally sound.

If A1's blog posts are indeed a joke, he's just being A1. If A1's blog posts are serious, he's just being A1. So the moral of the story, it's all no big deal and it appears the appointment of new Admins is well in hand. Win-win As for A1, he knows better than anyone else, you live by the sword...

I'll try an explanation of what this film is. Optimistically, I'd say Apocalypto is... A film which examines one possible explanation for the fall of the Mayan culture, contrasting this ancient civilization with our modern societies. Looking at these people, the choices they made and they way they lived makes us realize we are not all that different from those wrongly labelled "barbaric" empires of our history. Pessimistically, I'd say Apocalypto is... Another right wing allegorical film designed to create fear among the fearful in turbulent times so that we would beleive modern society (the U.S. more pointedly) is rapidly spiraling toward certain doom because of change - the perceived abandonment of morals, tradition, religion, et cetera. Oh yeah, cool trailer

Hmmm, only two days left and it's only at $31k. Looks like it's reaching the peak. Unless last minute bidding becomes a frenzy

I would very much agree. Backwards compatibility with DVD will have to be a mandatory feature of all next generation formats if they want people to buy into new technology this quickly.

Given the extensive library of film that I adore as much or more than Serenity, such a policy isn't "economically viable" for me

Because when someone doesn't understand something, they typically respond rationally...they ask. Throwing some condescending, misdirected tirade at me is hardly the way to convince me that "no offense was intended." I am displeased with the way in which Sin City was released and the lengthy wait for a proper edition. Concurrent bare-bones/special edition releases on DVD seem to be no problem for many titles. Even more, some titles are only released in a special-features filled format. Sin City's release was the most recent I've experienced so it made a good example, hence "Sin City anyone?"

If one more person on this board posts their imminent marriage, I'm going to get depressed and call one of my ex's. Please have mercy on me, no more marriages

I suppose reviewing so much anime, one has to accept certain "realities" of the state of dubbing japanese animation into english. A good dub is so rare, it's difficult to hold the rest of dubbed anime to such a standard, or even to demand better. For that reason alone, I can understand the reviews and the reality of judging comparable anime series. I can also understand the perspective many of these reviewers will have. Macross isn't really special to most of these modern anime websites. Noteworthy for certain, as a piece of anime history. However, the peak of Macross (like so many other beloved anime shows of previous decades) has been reached and left. Looking objectively at the series from the mindset of a current anime critic leads to some pretty harsh realisations about the series. I suspect this is not unlike the harsh revelations many nostalgic Star Wars fans suffered in 1999 Personally, Macross will always remain one of the greatest moments of my history as an anime fan, like so many films from the 1970's and earlier that remain astonishing to my eyes even today. I can't blame these reviewers for lacking immersion in such an old series as Macross when I myself was unable to do the same with shows like the original Mobile Suit Gundam upon my very first viewing back in 2000. I guess you had to be there In spite of the reviews (which I'm glad are mostly positive) I still haven't changed my mind, as I feel the dub is certainly weak. Perhaps I'm giving Macross and the original japanese cast far too much credit, but I expect better of modern dubs.

The death of birth.

Very entertaining, but the ending was disappointing. I was really hoping it would go somewhere. Still, it was hilarious to see the fight and the two different series of characters on the same battleground.

Y'know anybody who reads dvdnews.com, dvdjournal.com, thedigitalbits.com or a million other upcoming dvd reports would know that the extended version of Sin City was coming and skipped the first one. There are many, many examples of overtly evil double-dipping and it always bugs me when one of the few companies to come out and say "hey - we're doing a special edition in a few months", like Sin City or LotR gets crapped on by fans who felt they weren't informed enough. What else should the studio do? Send out people to Best Buy to keep fanboys from buying the barebones? Some people (Blockbuster renters) want a quick, barebones release. At least with some movies you actually know a better version a few months later. Okay, soapbox aside - I haven't heard any reports of a bigger, better version of Serenity than the Dec. 20 release. I imagine since it didn't do Sin City business at the box office, they'd only do a better version if the Dec 20 version sold incredibly well. 353912[/snapback] Let's do something different this time and ALLOW facts to get in the way of the preaching shall we. I never did purchase the bare bones Sin City DVD upon first release. Second, I did know about the Recut-Extended Sin City edition before the first DVD was released (Rodriguez said as much, before any posting on those DVD websites). And lastly, it's a consumer right to protest how and in which way the products we buy are released and whether or not we purchase them. That's how products improve and the consumer influences the demand. There, that's much better. Now we can all continue our regularly scheduled thread playing well with others.

Well, it will have a commentary track and deleted scenes at the very least. I believe there some other bonus bits, but I can't recall what they are off the top of my head. 353892[/snapback] Just picked it up. The DVD has enough special features for the type of film it is. Deleted Scenes, Outtakes, A Featurette about bringing Firefly to the big screen, and Commentary by Director Joss Whedon (my favorite). Definitely worth picking up.