Penguin

"Those of you who continue to profess a belief in your financial solvency will receive the standard substandard collectibles, which will result in your eventual elimination. Those of you who renounce this superstitious and hysterical belief will be eligible to join the Western Elite of the MCP (Macross Collectors in Poverty)." ... and that's how my mind works.

Gotta be the 1/60 VF-22S Gamlin version. My fave VF in cool colours.

Just saw it tonight. Not much in the way of dark humour, to answer your question Taks. I went in not expecting to much, and found it entertaining enough. As I figured, it didn't capture the atmosphere of the original. Mostly jack in the box scares and a couple of decent moments of tension. Characters are thin. Beltrami's score is servicable, but nowhere near as creepy as Morricone's. Special effects likewise servicable, though I found them a bit repetitive, compared to how the original had something new every time the thing came out. CG did allow for some interesting images and ideas. I'll give them credit for making sure the camp ends up in the same condition as when MacReady and Doc Copper find it. I can only think of one contradiction in the whole film. Didn't see anything post-credits either... just the finale extends into the end credits. I actually liked that part quite a bit. Overall, I'd give it a 6.5 out of 10.

Just got around to seeing it this weekend. Fantastic film. Terrific soundtrack. Will definitely be joining my blu-ray collection on its release.

Well, the original is often labelled "John Carpenter's 'The Thing' ", so the prequel can be "Matthijs van Heijningen's 'The Thing' ". Doesn't quite roll off the tongue.

It all boils down that George never figured out that parallels and symmetry can be effective except when you bludgeon the audience over the head with them.

The theatrical BDs don't have any extras, but the extended editions do have all the same bonus material. More even. There are three extra discs of content for each movie, compared to 2 for the DVDs. You get the full two-disc appendices for each movie plus another behind-the-scenes disc for each as well. Haven't had the initiative to go through all that. It would take me a month.

I would say it depends on what those problems were. Like most extended editions, the additions are mostly character building scenes, dialogue, and the like. So, if you thought the characters needed more development, then yeah, the EEs will improve on that. There are a few action scenes added back in (such as the fate of Saruman), but nothing mind-blowing. If you had problems with pacing, then the EEs will NOT help. Running times increased on the order of 30 minutes. So, at least when Jackson gives you an extended edition, it's substantial. But, if you ever found yourself thinking "when will this be over", the EEs will have you tearing your hair out. Me, I like 'em. I'm only a casual LoTR fan myself, but I find that when I watch them, I always watch all three in a row and make a day of it... usually while I'm sketching, building model kits, etc. Helps to pass frigid Canadian winter weekends.

Wow... that just flies in the face of crass consumerism and all marketing known to man.

Looking at my discs, you're right about Aliens. It's referred to as the 1991 Special Edition. Alien, though, was and is marketed as the 2003 Director's Cut, both in the DVD/Blu-rays and the big poster on my living room wall. I don't know how I'd weigh the improvement against every other director's cut , but I'd very much agree Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut is immensely more enjoyable than the theatrical release. One I didn't think benefited much: The Exorcist. Similar to the 2003 Alien, they marketed it around adding a single scene: the so-called "spider-walk". The end result didn't impress me much. Here's one for people to consider: Terminator 2: Judgement Day Special Edition. As with Aliens and Avatar, it's another Cameron expansion which adds a lot of back story for the characters and makes an already long movie even longer. I know some who think the additions make it really drag, while others love the additional character bits. What are the opinions around here? For that matter, how about the Avatar special edition? I never thought Avatar had all that impressive a story in the first place (very pretty, but pretty predictable), but I liked that the special edition added some more dimension to Jake, and I thought showing Earth in the opening scenes made Jake's later statement about how humanity had "killed its mother" a bit more resonant. On the flip side, you could argue that it's more effective leaving the squalor of future Earth to our imaginations, much like seeing only on Earth in Blade Runner leaves the audience with an appreciation why "Let's all go... to the colonies!" could be an attractive option.

Well, I think they're all marketing ploys, at the end of the day. Adding something different from the original theatrical release is an attempt to sway us to spend money on the new version. I do think some additions rise above mere marketing, while others are pretty transparent, and some down right pathetic. I've found "unrated" cuts are usually the most suspect. It seems mostly applied to either raunchy comedies or horror films, but only rarely adds any real value. As someone else noted, it just means it didn't go before the MPAA, but the marketing implies so much more. True "Director's Cuts" are supposed to be a restoration of the director's original version, good or bad, but the term is used erroneously too. Alien is a good example. Scott had final cut. Alien as shown in 1979 is the Alien he wanted. It already is the director's cut. The re-release with the altered footage was more of an experiment to add back in the "transformation" sequence with Dallas at the end, plus a few other deleted scenes, and of course, sell more tickets. Scott re-edited it and actually removed perfectly good footage to make space for some alternate scenes to try and keep the pacing up. In fact, it ended up shorter than the original release by a minute or two. Yet, they labelled this the "Director's Cut", when in fact he's on record saying he prefers the original. Personally, I'm with Ridley on that. The only little scene I really liked was the added character bit of Lambert going postal on Ripley outside the sickbay. At least, I think that was in the re-release. If not, it's a cool deleted scene. Generally, I've never held with any notion about a "true" version of a film. Some films are improved when revisited, some aren't. Regardless of what they add or why, it's all kinda hit and miss when it comes to the end result. Mostly it's all a matter of personal taste. I do think people get way too bent out of shape about changes. I adore film as a medium. Movies can have significant emotional impact on me. And yes, small changes in lighting, dialogue, camera position, can dramatically alter the impact of a scene. That's one of the cool things about the medium. But of all the things to get enraged about in this world, changes to a movie have to come in near dead freakin' last for me. When I think of "altered releases", the following typically come to mind (excepting Alien, which I already touched on). - Star Trek: The Motion Picture special edition does improve the visuals. No help for the pacing. - The Independence Day special edition actually conquered the one thing that really shattered my suspension of disbelief when I first saw it... Jeff Goldblum writing a computer virus for the alien ship. The special edition adds a scene showing him using the captured fighter to figure out the computer system. Shows how one scene can really change your perception. - Highlander II: the "Renegade" version: It's still a crappy movie, but they removed planet Zeist and fixed the really horrendous editing errors. (I mean, seriously, how did those even get into theatres?) One of those instances where any improvement is good. - Aliens director's cut: I try to get people who haven't seen it to watch the theatrical version first. LV426 is so much creepier coming into it cold with the Marines. Afterwards, if you like the film, the director's cut adds dimension. I like 'em both, but there's a definite change in the experience from one to the other. - Blade Runner: Love the Final Cut. 'nuff said. - Superman the Movie: A little bit ambivalent on the additions. Some are good, some kinda slow it down, mostly positive, I think, but not always. - Lord of the Rings: I bought the theatrical versions when they came out DVD, thinking "maybe some times I'll prefer a shorter trip". Never watched 'em. - Apocalypse Now Redux: How to take a movie from slow burn to screeching halt. - Green Lantern: Hasn't even been released, and I'm already thinkin' 6 more minutes ain't gonna change Hal Reynolds from being a whiny punk. - The Descent had the ending changed for the North America release, so the DVD/Blu-ray release with the original downbeat UK ending is often portrayed as a "Director's Cut". Neil Marshall approved of the change, being of the opinion that it was the terrifying journey up to that point that was the real point of his movie (not to mention that it let the studio create an entirely repetitive and predictable sequel). So, from a certain perspective, they're both Director's Cuts. Since it was brought up, I have to weigh in on the "Deckard replicant" issue. I know Ridley loves the idea from the plot twist perspective, but talk about a way to ruin a character's emotional arc. One of the major themes of the story, how the so-called artificial people have more emotional depth than so-called real people and Deckard growing as a result of his experience, is entirely junked if Deckard is a replicant. So, I gotta side with the screenwriter, and ignore Ridley's "gee whiz, that's sneaky of me" glee. If he does something in this future film to insist that Deckard was a replicant, I'll be disappointed. It's not entirely on topic, but this also made me think of Danny Boyle's commentary on the alterate endings to "28 Days Later". If you like the film and haven't seen them, they represent to me a good case of how a director can get out of touch with the audience's experience.

Plays fine on my PS3, so I'd say it was a problem with your disc.

They all play fine for me, but the control for them is a little peculiar. If you select just one deleted scene, it immediately goes to the top where you select commentary or not, then plays the scene. If you just select the commentary without selecting a scene first, then that seems to start "play all" in that commentary mode. If you didn't mention that some scenes don't play at all, I'd have concluded that's just the weird control setup.

That "stubbier" version that Hikaru holds the model of is the prototype. The release version is in Flashback 2012, is plenty sleek, and totally canonical.

I'll be one to agree with you. The rage over the Star Wars edits is much ado about nothing IMHO, while their attempt to re-launch the Conan franchise wasn't just pathetic, it was an insult to fans of the original. Although I'd also argue that, with so many years since the previous Conan, there wasn't much of a franchise to ruin... just an attempt to use an established brand to sell a crappy movie to teen and near-teen boys, or if you'd prefer, a giant "screw you" to Howard's legacy. However, that is a story for another thread.

Y'know, I'm utterly bored with all the drama over Star Wars and Lucas and whatever stupid little changes he makes. I saw Star Wars when I was 7, and nothing he does changes anything about that experience, nor are any of his tweaks remotely important enough for me to spend the tiniest bit of energy thinking about. Well, except the fraction of a calorie it took to type this, I mean.

I had an original IMAI version that I built years ago. Don't know whether I still have it packed away somewhere. It's more likely that it was disposed of during a move. All I remember is that I ignored the model's paint guide and instead patterned it after the Do You Remember Love green/tan colour scheme instead.

Ah... must've been the original IMAI instructions that I'm thinking of. I forgot that Bandai redid all the instruction manuals for their re-releases.

Don't the instructions have the H-codes for the paints? I don't have a copy of them around, but if I recall correctly, on the front page of the instructions, there's a picture of all the sprues with the parts painted, and in that picture there will be H numbers indicating the colours, either underneath little colour swatches at the top of the picture, or within the picture, pointing to the parts they are for. There's a Gunze hobby colour paint chart here: Gunze Paint Chart

Well, the latest Battlestar Galactica, Firefly, and SDF Macross are top contenders for me. The Eccleston and Tennant runs on Doctor Who are right up there too, as are Star Trek TOS and TNG, and Babylon 5. Honourable mentions to Deep Space Nine, which rallied in its later seasons, Space: Above and Beyond, which had some good ideas but uneven execution (to be charitable), and the last season of Enterprise, which I throroughly enjoyed. My 10-year-old self compels me to mention the original Battlestar Galactica and Buck Rogers, which I still get a kick out of now and again, but definitely wouldn't count as "best".

Those are all Gunze references.

Man, do I want that. Always loved the VA-3.

That's what happens when the movies are driven by a flim maker who's career isn't just Star Trek. In the old days, Paramount picked whatever director/former-cast-member-with-aspirations they wanted to and cranked out the films. You get more frequent films, but quality is hit and miss. Not that J.J. couldn't totally screw up the sequel. There are just higher expectations that he won't.

I dunno. Staying in the main continuity but going even further forward... they were already to heavy into "technobabble saves the day" by the time Voyager ended. I don't know that I'd care to see another century of advancing technophilia and deus ex machina. Maybe if, during that intervening century, something catastrophic happened to bring the Federation and all the other gangs down a notch or two. Something analogous to the slide from Star League to Successor States in Battletech comes to mind. I'd be more interested. Oh, hell, y'know, whatever they do, I'll keep abreast of the development, and no matter how bad it sounds, I'll end up watching the first few episodes at least. Can't lie to myself.

I'd buy it If anyone's interested, Hobbylink Japan's got Softbank's next Gundam Master Archive (equivalent to their Macross Variable Fighter Master File) up for pre-order. Their RGM-79 volume was cool, so I'd recommend it. Master Archive Mobile Suit RX-78 Gundam