51

(18 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I didn't Lava it either.  The longer it went on, the more I was really hoping there'd be a hell of a payoff that would make it worthwhile, but... no.  Pretty pictures, tho.

Inside Out, on the other hand... lava lava lava.  All the lava.

The original Max trilogy is a self-contained story with a beginning middle and end.  Fury Road's not a sequel, it's a reboot that uses some of the same elements, like the tanker chase from Max 2 and the extreme post-apocalypse world-building of Max 3.     Fury Road starts right about where Max 2/Road Warrior did, but then just goes off in an entirely new direction.

There are a lot of little references to the originals - certain costumes, the music box, etc, but there's no need to figure out how Fury Road fits into the original timeline, because it doesn't.

53

(11 replies, posted in Off Topic)

It was an apartment fire.  Do you not have those in Idaho? 

Apologies if that's because there aren't any apartments in Idaho.  I'm sure it has many nice features.

We still show the pilot and the series bible to potential buyers when we find one, but at this point I doubt that Ark will ever get resurrected.  Nowadays it serves more as a demo of what we can do, as a sales tool when pitching new projects.

Passengers actually predates Ark.  It was a highly ranked script on the Black List in 2007 - I believe that exposure is how Jon Spaihts' career got started.   I read the script at the time, and have to say I wasn't impressed.  It was an interesting concept but undercut over and over by a lot of dumb ways the spaceship "worked" that made absolutely no sense other than it justified plot points happening.   

It also had a lot of overused space-tropes, including my personal pet peeve "the ship's computer is damaged!".   This trope was acceptable when 2001 and Star Trek were made, because that was an era when a "computer" was the size of a studio apartment and there were about twenty of them in the whole world.  But that was fifty years ago - it's not the world we live in now.  I'm pretty sure the USS Theodore Roosevelt is never going to be crippled and adrift in the Persian Gulf because "the computer" went down.    I say anyone who writes a sci-fi script in the 21st century that includes a reference to the "ship's computer" is being lazy. 

In fact I hate that trope so much that in the story bible I wrote for the Ark series, the fact that there IS no "ship's computer" becomes a major story element.  smile

Passengers has been pretty much in continuous development ever since 2007 - Keanu was going to do it for a while - so if it really does get made this time, it might be a very different script than the one I read.  Or at least I hope it will be.

Anyway, Ark was made in 2008 and I have no idea if the creator of Ark was inspired at all by the existence of the Passengers script, but there were a couple of plot points in early versions of Ark that I removed because they were reminiscent of Passengers even though they were probably just coincidental.

Pandorum, the space ark movie that came out in 2009, was shot after we shot Ark, but was released first.  There's no connection there that I'm aware of, though.

As for Dark Matter, which I just found out about a few days ago... there might be something more than coincidence there.  Ark was pitched to Syfy more than once, but that was several regimes ago.  Is there any actual connection?  Dunno.  Other than the one-line description the two shows seem very different - so even if Ark was somehow a vague inspiration for Dark Matter there's nothing to be done about it.  It's just how it goes sometimes.

BigDamnArtist wrote:

So to have so many kinda wishy washy "maybe they dead?" conclusions (Stannis, Jon, Theon, Sansa) it just feels strange.

If we assume every cliffhanger ends badly - Jon's dead, Stannis is dead, Arya failed Kill School and is blind for life, Theon and Sansa are paste, Drogon dies of his wounds, the Dothraki kill or abduct Daenerys and Daario & Jorah never find her - then the season ender could work as a series finale.   

So look at the bright side - Tyrion and Varys get to run a country, Brienne finally completes her quest, and Cersei and Jaime have been punished as much as can be reasonably expected. 

On the Game of Thrones scale, that pretty much counts as a happy ending.  Tadahh!

The strongest argument for Jon only being mostly dead is the "Who were his parents?" mystery, which the books and the show have both put a fair bit of time into dangling as a big reveal to come someday.   

All the more so since that was the famous question GRRM asked Benioff and Weiss when they were seeking the rights to turn the books into a series.  They answered correctly, and the rest is history.   Would Martin have asked that question if Jon's story was ultimately just going to be a dead end?   

I suppose there could be a way to someday say "Hey, remember that guy who died?  Guess who his parents were?" and have that still matter somehow, but it seems like it'd be kinda hard to make that work.  smile

I don't think this is out of character for Stannis at all.  To me, Stannis comes across as a guy who truly desires always to do the "right thing" - but that's different for different people, isn't it?

Unlike others who want the Iron Throne, my impression is that Stannis isn't seeking power for its own sake - he truly believes he is the rightful heir, is all.  He doesn't want to be King - more like he honestly believes he should be.  He went to war against his own brother for trying to usurp the throne when Stannis was next in succession.   

And also unlike others, he really seems to get that winter is coming and the real battle is yet to be fought.  The way he's been portrayed in the entire series is mostly a dogged, resigned trudge to getting this civil war over with as fast as possible, by whatever means he has available.

Not to mention - he's a religious fanatic.  Or at least a true believer - and he ought to be because the Fire God actually does deliver if you pay the toll.  Hell, I saw how Renly died, I believe in the Fire God too. 

So - Stannis is in a bad place.  He's going to lose the war he believes he must win for the good of all.  The Fire God (via Melisandre) says, I can bail you out - but this one's gonna cost you.   As the honorable man Stannis tries to be, and thinks he is, how can he NOT make that sacrifice?  It's not about him, it's about the greater good.    If Stannis can continue on his righteous quest then he did the right thing, by his definition.

Now, the REAL gut punch would be... if the Fire God doesn't make good.  I doubt that's how it's gonna go, but I like pondering what it would do to Stannis to realize he made that sacrifice for nothing.

Saniss wrote:

How they didn't destroy dozens of cameras filming this, I'd like to know.

Apparently they did destroy quite a few, but it was part of the plan - http://filmmakermagazine.com/94242-dp-j … fury-road/

Hadn't really thought about how well 7D's and such can serve as crash cameras - they're small and cheap, and all you need to worry about after the crash is salvaging a tiny memory card.  That's an option that's never been available to stunt filmmakers until just recently.

60

(9 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Here in the States, we have both types - "natural spring water" and just "water in a bottle".  They're labeled appropriately, but I doubt everybody reads the labels that closely.  Dasani is indeed just tap water put into bottles.  It's not illegal but I bet a lot of people would be surprised to know that's all it is.

Penn&Teller did a Bullshit episode long ago about bottled water - my favorite tidbit was that bottled water is classed as a food product, so it's regulated by the FDA. But the FDA doesn't put a high priority on checking bottles of water vs. putting their efforts into making sure meat and produce aren't full of deadly bacteria and so on.  Meanwhile, tap water is regulated by umpteen different agencies to make sure it's safe.  So anyone who drinks bottled water on the assumption that it's somehow "safer" than tap water has it exactly backwards.

61

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Violent Year is my least favorite of Chandor's three major releases so far - which is only to say I respect it, just didn't love it like I loved All Is Lost and Margin Call.   I just chalk it up to "well, that one wasn't for me" and I'm eagerly looking forward to seeing whatever he does next.

62

(164 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I just started (intermittently) binge-watching Justified, am about to watch the 1st season finale.  Enjoying it so far, and will likely continue working my way thru the seasons.   Got a very interesting tone to it,  the only other show I can think of that feels similar is Longmire, which I also like.

63

(44 replies, posted in Episodes)

I mentioned Phil in the 2001 commentary? 

Well, okay...

In the mid-80's I ran lights at the Groundling Theater, an improv group that was (and is) one of the sources Lorne Michaels would scout for potential new cast members for SNL. So every summer Lorne would come to town and watch the show from the very back of the theater, as quietly and anonymously as possible.  Of course he wouldn't stand up at the end of the show and yell "I want THAT one!".  He'd just leave and whoever he liked would get contacted and maybe do a formal audition... and if all went well - boom, SNL.

The total Groundling cast is larger than the actual number of people performing any given night, because people get other gigs and aren't always available on show nights.   In 1985 Phil Hartman and Jon Lovitz were in the cast, along with Kathy Griffin and many other talented folks - but in my opinion Phil was far and away the best.  Just freakin' brilliant, both in his scripted sketches and at improv.  And a genuinely nice guy. 

Phil was getting small parts in movies and tv so he wasn't always there - but when he was, I always knew it would be a good night.   Meanwhile, Lovitz WAS always there, because what else was THAT guy gonna do?  smile

So at some point Lorne came and did his annual shopping trip.  A few months went by, and it dawned on me that Lovitz hadn't been around for a while.  I remember asking the sound operator "Where has Lovitz been lately?" and she looked at me like I was insane and said "He's on Saturday Night Live now!"  Which I honestly didn't know - I hadn't been watching the new season.

And I said "Are you telling me that Lorne Michaels came here...and he saw Phil Hartman and Kathy Griffin and (several other names)... AND HE PICKED LOVITZ?"

To Lovitz's credit he did great that season - '85 was that very weird year when instead of comedians the cast was mostly actors (Robert Downey Jr., Anthony Hall, Joan Cusack, Randy Quaid... seriously, that was a thing that happened) and in that crowd Lovitz was the standout.   Pretty soon "Yeah, that's the ticket!" was a national catchphrase. Which I suspect was what Lorne spotted, because Lovitz's "Liar" character was one he'd been doing at the Groundlings for ages.   And Jon and Phil were close, so for all I know Lovitz might have spent that season saying "next year you gotta get Phil in here".   Meanwhile Phil continued to perform at the Groundlings and be brilliant at it.

And so, a year goes by.  Almost everybody from the '85 SNL season got fired, only Lovitz and Nora Dunn and Dennis Miller survived.  And Lorne went shopping again.

On show nights before the show started, I would sit on a couch just inside the dressing room entrance, because the cast would have new pieces and we'd discuss what they needed from the lighting. (Also because it was a hilarious place to be.)   I remember the night when Phil walked into the dressing room and said "Well, who wants to congratulate the newest cast member of Saturday Night Live?" 

I was right there, so I got to be the first person to shake his hand.   

And then off he went to New York and there ya go.

PS.  A year or two later I was in New York - I don't even remember why, it was just for maybe two days. By this point Phil was a rockstar, of course.  Just for the hell of it, I looked up the number for 30 Rock, and I dialed it and asked for Studio 8H, and it started ringing.  Someone answered and I said, is Phil Hartman available?   They put the phone down awhile and then came back and said "no, he's not here right now."  And I said "Well, tell him Trey Stokes called, I'm in town and wanted to say hi". I gave the hotel number where I was and hung up.  And then went back to LA and forgot about it, because obviously nothing was gonna come from that.  But it was hilarious to me that you could just call for Phil Hartman at Studio 8H and somebody would actually go look for him.

Later that year around Christmastime I'm at the Groundlings on show night as usual, sitting on my dressing room couch - and Phil walks in unannounced. SNL's on hiatus, he's home for the holidays and he's dropped in to say hi to the old gang. 

He sees me sitting there and says "Oh hey, Trey - got your message and called you back, but the hotel said you'd checked out already.  Sorry I missed you!"

That's who that guy was.

Addendum: If you haven't seen this clip of Phil's SNL audition, here you go.  So this is the guy I knew, and a lot of this material is excerpts from pieces I saw him do a dozen times at the Groundlings.   His "Jack Nicholson's Hamlet" was one of my faves.

64

(35 replies, posted in Off Topic)

As has been pointed out, even if you did go through the complicated process of tipping an arrow with a Prince Rupert drop, the only result is that some of the targets would get dusted with a handful of (tempered) glass.  That's like having a handful of sand thrown at you - an annoyance in comparison to being hit by an arrow in the first place.    You'd get better results with a hollow clay arrowhead full of regular glass shards - and then again you'd mostly just be reducing the effectiveness of the arrow as an arrow

If the goal is to add some secondary effect if the target isn't killed outright, dip the arrowheads in dung.  Or animal venom.  Or plant toxins.  Or set them on fire.   I'll take a shower of glass dust over any of those options. smile

65

(35 replies, posted in Off Topic)

We have reviewed your proposal for a new weapons system - thank you for your submission.
After careful consideration, we feel that the complexities of manufacture and delivery make your proposal unfeasible for us at this time.  Instead, we have opted to continue with our current system of setting the arrows on fire, which has proven highly successful.

Yours,
Genghis Khan

66

(152 replies, posted in Episodes)

Raven wrote:

I found you guys entirely on accident (that's for Trey)

http://www.bakthavathsalam.com/images/Chest-Pain.jpg

Raven wrote:

And I could listen to Trey tell stories all day

http://www.sunnyskyz.com/images/webpics/2012-11/98fl3-happy-face.jpg

67

(649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I dunno, I always wanted to attend my own funeral.

I mean, I probably will someday but... you know what I mean.

68

(32 replies, posted in Episodes)

sellew wrote:

You then have to explain Gaff's origami unicorn, but there are various ways to do that.

The theatrical release's explanation of the unicorn fits right in with your theory.  It may have meant something different before the addition of the Deckard voiceover, but the movie you shoot isn't always the same as the movie you release

In the released version, the voiceover explicitly explains that the unicorn means Gaff had been there, but chose not to kill Rachel.  What the figure is didn't have any significance in 1982 - all the "what does the unicorn symbolize?" debate came from later releases.

This ties in with Gaff's last line in the previous scene - "Too bad she won't live, but then again who does?"  So Gaff too has gained some empathy, enough to skip an opportunity to further his own career by bagging a runaway replicant, and instead letting Deckard escape with Rachel.  He isn't going to help them, but he doesn't stop them.

"I don’t want to listen to you no more, you empty-headed animal food trough wiper podcast. I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a sine wave and your father was a secondary audio track!"

http://www.pinkfive.com/images/post/python.jpg

70

(152 replies, posted in Episodes)

Hansen wrote:
Trey wrote:

Well, that and that I never got to do the episode where I explain why Spaceballs is a terrible movie.

Is it because Mel Brooks decided to spoof something popular that he didn't understand and not something he actually had an intense love for? 'Cause that's totally  my reason for why it sucks.

Damn. Nailed it.  *high five*

71

(152 replies, posted in Episodes)

Zarban wrote:

You guys, don't wory. i know a guy who'se done like 600 commentries. its ok he's got this.

My one regret is that now we'll never catch up to him.

Well, that and that I never got to do the episode where I explain why Spaceballs is a terrible movie.

72

(152 replies, posted in Episodes)

This is why we fought the battle for Net Neutrality.  So we could have glorious things like this.

/goes into the West

http://i.imgur.com/N2cjj2J.gif

http://i.imgur.com/E0dp3OZ.gif

73

(50 replies, posted in Episodes)

Finally, Blomkamp fesses up.

Apology accepted, Neill.  Now don't go making the same mistakes with Alien, umkay?

74

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Saw Kingsman, and pretty much what Avatar said above, ditto.   Doesn't come together as beautifully as KickAss - some setups seemed to be missing payoffs and vice versa - but overall I had a good time with it.  It's got some third-act choices that genuinely surprised me.

And Sam Jackson as a lisping supervillain was certainly a refreshing change of pace.

75

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I'm not sure how many of you have access to this, but select IMAX theaters are showing the final two episodes of Season 4 of Game of Thrones (The Wall and The Children). 

And seven hells, it was the best movie I've seen in a long time.  Even though it was a tv show.  And I'd already seen it.  Really made me appreciate what a high-quality product GoT is, across the board.   

The best part was getting to hear the episodes on a mega-theater sound system.  Those opening titles were like melodic thunder.

If you're a GoT fan, worth a look.  In fact, I'd be curious to hear reactions from people who aren't GoT fans.  There's an extended "previously on Game of Thrones" montage to catch you up on most everything you need to know... and if you just watch The Wall as an hour-long movie about a siege knowing nothing about it at all, you still might dig it.