BTW, fun fact: Although the US military normally works closely together with Marvel on their military shots (e.g. in Iron Man et al), they actually pulled out of cooperation on the Avengers movie. Why? Because they were uncomfortable with the SHIELD organization and weren't sure how it fit into the chain of command in the Pentagon.
I am not kidding.
I take it you also like G.I. Joe? You should probably watch Battleship then.Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Hope is the denial of reality
Honestly? Battleship and Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter are high on my list. Notably because they both looked ridiculous in both premise and execution.I take it you also like G.I. Joe? You should probably watch Battleship then.
Don't forget to shout "America, Fuck Yeah" while watching them.
Hope is the denial of reality
Best. Movie. Ever.
Saw a looooong promotional trailer on teevee last night for Prometheus ...
*shivers*
Haven't seen the movie yet, but in the Marvel Universe the Asgardians are simply really powerful high tech people, not true gods. At least thats how they are treated around Captain America so as to not call into question his protestant faith. Marvel still holds to the one-above-all concept.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Loki are you really complaining that a movie based upon a comic book series had a shallow plot?
REALLY?
Were you expecting War and Peace?
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
*shrug* I've also watched both of the Iron Man movies, Thor, and Captain America, and I thought only Thor and the Avengers had particularly poor plots. Be honest here: the only reason you like the Avengers is because of the special effects and random one liners. Whedon didn't need a superhero movie to do either. Comic books might have simple plots, but they tend to be executed well. The only real problem I have with the comic books is that no one dies permanently, but this isn't exactly going to change in the movies.
Hope is the denial of reality
Most fans love the Avengers because he (and the actors) did a good job portraying the characters and the team.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Uh...no.
I liked the movie in how the hero's were portrayed, their interactions, and how it was squeezed into a 2:30 movie. (I like long movies)
Everything was going to take a back seat to the characters, cause Whedon had to prove you can get a big cast (and bigger characters) to work in a movie. (So there can be a second one)
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
Hugo, it was quite good!
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
I.E. A bunch of one-liners and cliches, with most of the heroes relying almost entirely on their strength to defeat the bad guys. Just think if the movie would play out any differently if most of the heroes were replaced.
Whedon had to prove the movie could make lots of money. The movie made lots of money.Everything was going to take a back seat to the characters, cause Whedon had to prove you can get a big cast (and bigger characters) to work in a movie. (So there can be a second one)
Hope is the denial of reality
The more we keep you talking, the more you're going to hate the movie, aren't you?
No, I'm just surprised how people tend to ignore everything beyond the shiny effects and jokes. Those things certainly make this a good movie, but not a great movie (even as far as superhero movies go).
Spoiler:
Hope is the denial of reality
Spoiler:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...alos-hulk.html
Last edited by Aimless; 05-11-2012 at 05:02 PM.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
The watchman plot and ending was horrible. A lot of people let it slide because they remember the comic and they claim that aliens would have fallen flat, but the movie fucked up the message horribly (and stopped making any damn sense) by trying to unite the world because they believed that a US citizen attacked the US.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Most people only like Watchmen because of Akerman's boobs and whatshisface's butt. Or possibly because of blue dingdongs
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
The plan was to destroy all the main cities in the world, not just NYC. It's not actually clear if they destroyed all of them or only NYC. In either case, uniting against a common, more powerful enemy isn't exactly a unique plot...
As for blaming Dr. Manhattan instead of aliens, I somehow doubt it makes that much of a difference. And are you really going to be attacking the Watchmen for making a plot change when the Marvel movies are only loosely based on events in the comics?
Hope is the denial of reality
Whats clear is that the movie only mentions NYC, and only shows damage to NYC. Whats clear is that the comic books spends a great number of panels explaining and showing that the alien attack was worldwide, while the movie does not.
In the comic, the world is uniting against an unknown threat. The unknown is scary. In the movie the world is uniting against a US citizen, made powerful by US science, and who is used as a US military weapon. The world already knows what Dr. Manhattan is, and what he is capable of. He has already gone to war, he war a won, the losers treated me like a god. There is nothing in the movie to show why the world isn't doing the more likely action of bunkering down hoping they aren't next. There is nothing to show why the world isn't blaming the US for unleashing him to begin with, and there is nothing to suggest that the world wouldn't turn against the US to make sure he doesn't happen again.
and to top it all of, Ozymandias convinced Dr. Manhattan that this had to happen. He convinced him to go through with this, after months/years of planning and action. When all he had to do was sit him down and say "hey, lets do this."
You're performing the exact thought pattern that I brought up, you're using the comic book to fill in where the movie plot sucked horribly.
No i'm pointing out that the watchmen is a piss poor example of "every part of the movie was somehow important toward the main objective"And are you really going to be attacking the Watchmen for making a plot change when the Marvel movies are only loosely based on events in the comics?
Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 05-11-2012 at 11:54 PM.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
AH
Stark actually sees a shawarma joint, that's how he knows it's there
And damn you Americans and your extra-post-credits-scene-having fortune
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Quiz Show, about the quiz show scandals in the fifties. Pretty entertaining, good acting! Didn;t expect a film about quiz shows to e this entertaining
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Redbox did free movies yesterday, so I got Real Steel. Way better than I was expecting. Story is a mesh between the generic down on his luck dad vs forgotten son and Rocky, but it works very well (even if it took 2 hours to tell). The robot CGI was amazing.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Yep - directed by Robert Redford.Quiz Show, about the quiz show scandals in the fifties. Pretty entertaining, good acting! Didn;t expect a film about quiz shows to e this entertaining
V V good film.
Since last month, I've seen Cabin in the Woods, No Down Payment, Aliens, The Gang's All Here, The Avengers, Thelma & Louise, and Ordinary People.
They were all good, except for The Gang's All Here.
Your search had no results.
Finally sat through Sucker Punch. I don't see why it deserves the low ratings its gotten. Then again, the user rating is twice as high as the critic rating. Its easy enough to follow, rather predictable actually if you pick up the cues in the beginning. It looks amazing, lots of action, great settings all around. The scene involving the undead steam powered clockwork Nazis may have been the weakest of them all, but it was still an entertaining and enjoyable part of the movie. They nailed the soundtrack, which is good considering the plot.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Memorial Day weekend. Tons of military/war movies. Saw Eastwood's "Letters from Iwo Jima" for the first time. Very moving.
Beeb entertainments article about Prometheus ..., which is on general release today.
Prometheus sees Ridley Scott return to Alien world
Sir Ridley Scott is asking some fundamental questions in Prometheus, a prequel to his breakout hit film Alien.
British director Sir Ridley Scott has returned to the Alien franchise more than 30 years after warning cinemagoers: "In space, no-one can hear you scream".
It was a terrifying tagline right up there with: "Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the water" or "From the producers of Xanadu...".
But the catalyst for the new film Prometheus is not the sleek, razor-jawed H.R. Giger-designed xenomorph of the first movie and its sequels but rather a huge, unnamed figure who is only briefly glimpsed on screen.
"I was thinking about it afterwards when I was doing interviews and what's interesting is that nobody asked about him," says director Sir Ridley Scott referring back to his original 1979 breakout hit.
The huge figure in question has come to be known by fans as the "Space Jockey" - the lone pilot of a derelict spaceship investigated by the crew of the Nostromo - which featured Sigourney Weaver in her most famous role as Warrant Officer Ellen Ripley.
The "Space Jockey" was never formally introduced in the original 1979 film
The mummified figure, which looks at least twelve feet tall, sits at a set of controls with a large hole in its chest - a grim portent of the action to follow.
"I watched the further three Alien movies and it never came up," Sir Ridley adds.
Set around 40 years prior to the first movie, it features Girl With The Dragon Tattoo's Noomi Rapace, Charlize Theron, Michael Fassbender and Idris Elba, star of The Wire and Luther.
The film takes its name from the Greek mythological titan who stole fire from Zeus and gave it to the mortal world, only to be punished by having his liver torn out and eaten by an eagle day after day for all time.
It is also the name of the film's spaceship, carrying a team of scientists on a mission into deepest space to find the origins of mankind - following a map of star constellations found in cave paintings and carvings from ancient civilisations across the world.
It is the fundamental question of where man came from and how we evolved, which most intrigues the 74-year-old director - whose other films include Gladiator and Blade Runner.
"You go into the internet and get right into entomology, beetles, the design of underwater creatures and the more you see, the more you think, why did these evolve this way?" he says.
"I think it was John Updike who said something like, 'We've been here for about three billion years, why did nothing really significant happen to us physically until about 70,000 years ago?"
"Is he saying maybe there was something half a billion years ago which was a civilisation equal to ours? If you had a cataclysmic event, there would be nothing left but atoms, particles, therefore could we have existed before and if we did, who or what destroyed it.
"But also, who created us and who kicked it all off again."
Michael Fassbender (right) is the ship's Peter O'Toole obsessed android David, who may have his own agenda at work
Sir Ridley has touched on fundamental questions about humanity in his previous films - most obviously the sci-fi Blade Runner, which sees Harrison Ford hunting a gang of genetically-engineered beings seeking answers from their human creators.
Other themes revisited in Prometheus question whether life exists elsewhere in the universe and what happens to us after we die.
During his extensive research ahead of the film, Sir Ridley says he discovered that not even in the science world is there overwhelming agreement.
"I had a really great lunch with about 12 scientists and half of them believed in God and the other half roared with laughter said: 'Cobblers'."
This is reflected in the relationship between Rapace's scientist Elizabeth Shaw and her partner, who have fundamental differences in their beliefs - Shaw wears her late father's crucifix and still chooses to believe in a higher power while Holloway remains the cold pragmatist.
Charlize Theron plays Vickers, a corporate presence on the ship, while British actor Idris Elba (right) is the captain
Sir Ridley himself believes "it is getting entirely ridiculous to believe that in this galaxy we're the only lifeform".
Referring to planned exploration of Europa - a moon in orbit around Jupiter, he continues: "They are sending probes into Europa, the ice giant which has water at its core and they believe could contain life. So, suddenly the whole thing's changing and now they're acknowledging that."
With a budget reportedly in the region of around $130m (£84m), the new 3D blockbuster is on a much grander scale than Sir Ridley's Alien - only his second feature film - and its comparatively shoestring budget.
The grimy, claustrophobic and cold-looking spaceship Nostromo gives way to a much brighter, more advanced-looking model which creates some issues.
Huge leaps forward in film and computer-generated technology means Sir Ridley Scott and his production team can do much more than they could four decades ago.
The ship boasts some very natty state-of-the-art hardware such as 3D holograms and projections.
Though the director dismisses any perceived gap in the technology today within the confines of what he had created in 1979, saying the very nature of the film asks viewers to suspend disbelief: "We're so far in deep space that the idea of us getting out there you kind of sidestep that real question."
Prometheus has been released in the US as an R-rating, meaning viewers under the age of 17 will need to be accompanied by an adult. In the UK it is a 15 certificate.
The film is violent and tense but Sir Ridley - who has been an outspoken critics of the current rules of film ratings - insists he cut as much he could to open the film to a wider audience.
"It has to be be about the movie, so I've made concessions. There's a moment where you don't want to harm the movie.
But he acknowledges its a case of simple economics and getting an 18 certificate "could be the difference of $80m or more".
"It isn't real - I have monsters. Like the monsters in Lord of the Rings, for kids they were pretty scary but they got a PG-13 because their blood was black, that's rubbish".
Speaking of Theron, is anybody going to see Snow White and the Huntsman ? I was semi-interested until I saw that the Snow White character is played by Kristen Stewart. Blech.
Not really, but I did hear she plays decent in On the road. Might be more the film's fault than hers that she sucked in Twilight?
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
.jpg)
