Jump to content

reddsun1

Members
  • Posts

    2506
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by reddsun1

  1. Well that calls for a little hoorah! Was just watching Top Gear rerun last night--the Schumi "Stig reveal gag" episode--and wondered: has there been any change in his condition in all this time?
  2. These guys are fun-ny. then they went an' got straight epic with that sh*t. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN7B-_6Yo5U
  3. So, does this belong here? or in the Retro Gaming thread?
  4. John Q. Taxpayer ought not be too keen on that little waste of budgetary discretion, eh? Photo ops and the occasional public relations news story aside, that doesn't seem very sensible at all. Seems to operate on the assumption that the criminal set is of such a caliber that will mind the blue lights, be good sports about it all, eh? Must be nice, living in society so civilized as that...
  5. Must also remember that a lot of what we see the military using is ridiculously inadequate. There were some moments that were like: Seriously? Da fu*k do you think you're gonna do to that 300 ft dinosaur with an M4 carbine?!
  6. Hell, they've got prof X walking, and with hair; Wolverine's 6'+, and has nary any feral tendencies, etc, etc. So why expect them to make this guy look anywhere near the original? Then again--it'd probably be hard to take seriously or be intimidated by some big, hulking gray-skinned dude, with blue lips, shoulder pads, tights, and dryer ducts from his ass to his elbows...
  7. I went ahead and youtube'd the after-credits scene. That's supposed to be you-know-who? Christ--that ain't no __-____-__! Looks like they just got the manchick from Stargate.
  8. Now, Talladega Nights--that was a good NASCAR movie... Oh, wait. That's Stroker Ace. Oh, what's the difference....
  9. Meh, fu*kit. I just read the synopsis on imdb instead. Just something about the x-title movies so far that have been overwhelmingly "meh" for me. Can't quite put my finger on it; dunno if it's just the casting choices, or the production design--just something about them so far that have come up short for me, haven't felt like they've translated well in transitioning between mediums. First Class was pretty good, in spite of some holes in the plot/continuity that were like: dafuq? you couldn't invest 5 mins worth of character/story development time to make this a little more plausible? Think I'm gonna wait for cable for DoFP. From what I've read, sounds like a lot of characters were given the disposable treatment. But apparently the producers/writers were like: 'meh, fu*kit. we've got the naming rights, so let's just make some sh*t up. we're playing around with time travel and "alternate realities," so we can always retcon/change what doesn't suit the next installment.' See, this is what happens when folks disregard the source material. Do I think they ought to be page for page faithful to the comics? Of course not. That's just an unrealistic expectation. But when you go muddling the story arcs it's just gonna alienate the fan base that popularized the titles to begin with. Seems like it would make each successive installment that much more convoluted and harder to reconcile with the source material, too. For instance, this after-credits scene that foreshadows upcoming characters and stories. To that I'd counter with: well, where exactly do you expect to go with that? Seems like you've played the alternate-post-apocalyptic-future angle already with this movie; kinda makes a limp-di*k of that guy, now don't it? So adapting the 'AofA' story from the comics would seemingly feel too much like retreading old ground, wouldn't it? The 'X-Cutioner's Song' would be a pretty good one to adapt; but how many more film installments would you need just to establish the history and plausibility of Scott and Jean's long term relationship, the Summers family legacy and it's key role in the X-universe, to properly set the backdrop for that? And if you're gonna continue to make Wolverine the central character tying all the films in that little corner of that universe together: you need to pick up the pace (Marvel Studios, Fox, whoever). You've pretty well pissed away the better part of 15 years getting the first trilogy told--and subsequently cleaning up the sh*tstain mess that was the 3rd X-movie. You're either gonna have to reboot (Christ! again?!), or just how much longer can you realistically expect Hugh Jackman to keep reprising such action-heavy and physically rigorous character portrayals? Just saying...
  10. Ah, but we mustn't forget the theme that dir. Edwards is trying to convey with Ford's character. I may be way off, but I'm gonna go out on a limb here. I'm guessing he wants Ford to personify our men and women in uniform--or those of any nation with a volunteer-based army. So often, military personnel are expected to carry themselves, perform duties & missions, and hold themselves to a standard that could only be described as more-than-human. Many times, they are asked to do extraordinary things, put themselves routinely in harm's way. They can run the risk of getting shot or blow'd up or who knows what; they endure hardships that can strain relationships, or cost them loved ones along the way; they can be asked or expected to go on missions that seem pointless or with no real expectation of survival; and they are often expected to do so again, and again, and again. They can see and experience some pretty horrifying sh*t (albeit, not 300 ft lizards or bugs and such). So much more often than not, these real soldiers do so, without complaint, without hesitation, without melodrama (I know we've accused kickass of a "wooden" performance). They do it; and afterwards they pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and they go back out on that next mission (IIRC, a previous post touched on Ford's seemingly "indestructible" storyline). They're willing to do "whatever it takes," because it's their job; it's their duty; it's what they do. Just a guess. But in hindsight, I think maybe that's what Edwards was trying to get across...
  11. Indeed, there are elements of the original Godzilla films--and not just the Showa, but Heisei and Millenium era films too--from the acting, to the SFX et al that are pretty cringe-worthy. I distinctly remember a scene from G vs Space G in which the good guys take off in the robot Mogera(?) to intercept Space G before he gets to earth; and it consists of what is clearly a toy/model being swooshed around on strings, with styrofoam/plaster rocks in a big room with black drapes. I was like: this is so bad, it's good! I gotta show my 4 year old! "Hey son, c'mere! Godzilla's on TV!" But I think that's part and parcel with the genre; it's what makes them such a guilty pleasure, and what people have come to expect and dare I say love about the movies. After all, how many of us will notice a Godzilla/Gamera/etc movie on the tube and tune in half expecting to be able to gleefully go: "toy boat, toy boat" or "toy plane, toy plane" during any given scene?
  12. Sorry folks, there's profit to be had! Interestingly enough, out of the top 10 films with the biggest ever opening weekends, 5 of them have been comic book-based. Who'd a thunk it, eh? While it could be said that the Christopher Reeve Superman movies proved comics-films could be viable and successful, it could also be pointed out that Burton's Batman took the genre to the next level, made them hot property, and tapped into the mega marketing. Love it or hate it, Burton's Batman made the character "cool" again, and for audiences at large outside of comic fandom. It arguably brought ol' Bats back from the brink of obscurity. I liked the Burton-era versions of the costume and its functionality as protective armor, while still intimidating to criminals. Definitely preferred those to all the underwear-on-the-outside incarnations, anyways....
  13. Well I'll be damned. I nearly forgot this funny little cameo from 2009's Always Sunset on 3rd Street 2. I guess Toho had a lot more influence on the new Godzilla's design than I initially thought? From the differently shaped spines; to the shape of the jaw; to the nostrils... The super saiyan moment was funny. Let me guess; he's saying "this, I cannot forgive" or something to that effect?
  14. Must say: No sir. I don't like it. Looks too much like they're apeing Audi's front end design cues from 3-4 years back.
  15. Don't get me wrong--I like this new movie. I'll give it a 1 thumb up. I'm much more willing to forgive a film its flaws if it feels like they're genuinely trying to tell a good story. It actually does better at that than a fair number of the originals. Still pretty meh on the "bear-dinosaur" creature design though. But having seen the film, in hindsight I feel positively lied to. All those trailers for the movie are rather misleading (that ain't too spoilerific, is it?).
  16. Heh, those CG effects programmers don't know what hard work is. Now, H. Nakajima et al put in some work. The prototype suit for the '54 suitmation version weighed over 200 lbs. The 2nd version--even after refinements--was still so heavy and stiff, it could stand on its own when not in use. It's said the actors inside literally passed out from exhaustion and heat multiple times during filming... cap005.bmp cap007.bmp cap008.bmp
  17. Indeed, a very cool pic. The big kid in me would like to run up and give Mr. Nakajima a big hug. In a sense, he's like a childhood hero to me. Did anybody spot Akira Takarada (he played Ogata in the original) in the new movie? I'll admit I wasn't sure which character was him when I went to see it.
  18. OMFG, did anyone else notice? That mock Abrams tank in Cloverfield is the same one [one of them anyway] that was used in Godzilla! Sweartagod--that is the same tank that shows up on the Golden Gate in Godzilla. Looks like a dressed M60 Patton-era chassis to me... After reflecting on it a bit, I suppose we shouldn't come down quite so hard on Taylor-Johnson's character. After all, he's meant to personify our men and women in uniform; and I don't suppose director Edwards would've wanted to show them in an unfavorable light, as somehow "weak." But there were some moments where I was like: Christ, he's mailing this performance in, ain't he? ed: actually, we can come down so hard on Ford Brody. Was like watching a f'ing Gerry Anderson production.
  19. I dunno; the Jurassic Park films have aged very well over time. I still like the first 2 (3rd one was kinda 'meh.' they dethroned the T-Rex. ). It's almost a shame that no-one has truly surpassed those movies on the basis of immersive, "convincing" dinosaurs on screen in the 20+ years since... To this day, I still love finding for the infamous potted tree and lamp during the first T-Rex attack in the original. Go figure. ed: well, some scenes held up better than others. The dino stampede scene from the 1st movie does look a bit 'transparent' in comparison.
  20. Kanedas Bike: indeed, I did a bit of a double take when I saw that; what tha? did he just? Pshuh, 'studied the mechanics of animals fighting my a..' But I'm guessing that was meant as a nod to the cheesier, kid-friendly-era Godzilla films. renegadeleader1: regarding continuity, this is Hollywood we're talking about, eh? So what if a few historical details get muddled? 'Close enough' seems to be the rule of the day. And as for that other little by-the-way moment at the end, I'd wager that's gonna make a convenient plot-point for the sequel.
×
×
  • Create New...