I thought you were busy eating vegan goo in a fallout shelter or some sorta Unabomber shit.
3 2016-12-16 17:29:08
Re: ROGUE ONE. ALL THE SPOILERS. Seriously, don't go in here. (46 replies, posted in Off Topic)
My review:
4 2016-10-27 19:07:12
Topic: What The Fuck Is This? (2 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Awhile back, I stumbled across perhaps the most batshit insane Star Wars related thing of all-time. I shared it in a thread but nobody ever noticed it, so I'm posting it again:
Bigger Luke, commonly abbreviated to BL, or more uncommonly BgL, is the slightly larger manifestation of Luke Skywalker that is said to appear in certain scenes of the original Star Wars Trilogy, contrasting to Regular Luke.
The appearance of Bigger Luke in a particular scene is generally, but not always, judged relative to the height of Han Solo, and as such Han is the primary go-to frame of reference amongst Bigger Luke Theorists. Because of this, "No Han Pics"(commonly abbreviated to NHP) are generally discouraged, as it is very difficult to determine Luke's height without Han Solo as a constant frame of reference. Whilst uncommon, the use of other Star Wars characters to judge Luke's height are not unheard of. The second most common character to judge if Bigger Luke is in the scene or not has generally been Obi-Wan, followed closely by Princess Leia. The activity of combing the original Star Wars trilogy for instances of Bigger Luke is known as Luking.
Source: http://biggerluke.wikidot.com/bigger-luke
There's an entire wiki dedicated to this theory. It's either the most elaborate joke ever written or the work of people with severe aspergers and possibly schizophrenia. What are your thoughts?
5 2016-10-27 19:00:14
Re: This is a dumb poll, but I'm curious. (18 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Nope.
6 2016-05-19 03:38:01
Re: Defend your most controversial film opinion. (372 replies, posted in Off Topic)
The bugs from Starship Troopers did nothing wrong. Buenos Aires was inside job set up by the Federation to justify going to war with the bugs, there's no way they could've launched an asteroid from the other side of the galaxy to hit such a precise target - they didn't have the technology and it would've been picked up by Federation satellites and defense outposts long before it actually collided with Earth. The bugs didn't initiate any sort of attack and were only defending their home turf when the humans showed up.
7 2016-02-10 02:50:17
Re: New Star Trek (85 replies, posted in Off Topic)
http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/star-tr … 201700606/
Welp, that calms my concerns about Kurtzman.
8 2016-02-09 06:40:14
Re: Cool vids...again. (1,649 replies, posted in Off Topic)
I watched this:
And then this happened:
9 2015-12-20 02:18:27
Re: The Star Wars 7 Thread (SPOILERS. SERIOUSLY. ALL THE SPOILERS.) (276 replies, posted in Off Topic)
I recorded a two hour podcast today with four of my friends where went over the whole movie and our thoughts about everything. I'll post a link when it's uploaded.
10 2015-12-19 01:47:39
Re: The Star Wars 7 Thread (SPOILERS. SERIOUSLY. ALL THE SPOILERS.) (276 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Rob wrote:
The Empire is a literal corpse being picked apart for scrap.
That's why they were able to build a weapon bigger and more powerful than the Death Star, right?
11 2015-12-18 09:13:35
Re: The Star Wars 7 Thread (SPOILERS. SERIOUSLY. ALL THE SPOILERS.) (276 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Hey guys, let's discuss Rey's character flaws.
12 2015-12-14 09:03:56
Re: Hobbit 3 - Battle of the Bloated Trilogy (Soilers) (57 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Fucking piece of trash won't embed, watch it here:
13 2015-12-14 09:02:14
Re: Hobbit 3 - Battle of the Bloated Trilogy (Soilers) (57 replies, posted in Off Topic)
14 2015-09-19 23:46:12
Re: Last movie you watched (2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Despite all of its flaws (and there are several), I can't really hate on the most recent Rambo because the it contains some of the most barbaric bloodshed and over-the-top violence I've ever seen in a movie. I was expecting violence on par with the rest of the series and instead I got something that is almost reminiscent of the original Robocop. It's absolutely insane they got away with this in a theatrical release.
Look at this shit:
SPOILER 
Is it a good movie? Fuck no. Do I respect it for turning it up to 11? Hell yes.
15 2015-09-15 06:27:52
Re: Last movie you watched (2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Amen, Doty. I fucking loved that movie for the exact same reasons.
16 2015-09-12 00:05:19
Re: VFX Oscar Number Crunchin' (7 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Mad Max wins or the category is officially a sham.
17 2015-07-02 01:18:29
Topic: Terminator: Genisys (spoilers) (6 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Who sent the T-1000 back in time?
Was it the same T-1000 that attacked Sarah in 1973?
If not, what happened to that T-1000?
If so, why did it take them 11 years to kill it?
Who sent Pops back in time? How did the T-1000(s) and Pops somehow exist in the same timeline with the bad T-800 and Kyle being sent back in time - how could two timelines send four different beings to the same point in one timeline?
How did the T-1000 get the busted up T-800 to work just by dropping some liquid metal jizz on it? Was it the black goo from Prometheus?
What was the point of JK Simmons character?
How come Sarah gave Kyle the shotgun to use in the back of the truck but in the very next scene she's using the shotgun and he's using an M-16?
How did Pops survive the biggest fucking explosion ever just by hanging around in liquid metal?
How did Pops know about the Terminator that could change cells in a human? How did Pops know about nexus points? We've never seen one before and it was presumably built after mostly everything else but Pops is like the OG model of Terminator so how did he know?
Did the Terminator John really spend 3 years of his life just hanging out at Cyberdine and programming shit?
Did anyone involved in the making of this movie understand how software releases work?
Why was Sarah in such a rush to use the time machine in 1984? Doesn't she understand how a time machine works?
Why didn't they go to 2016 so they could have a whole year to takedown Skynet?
Why did they give away all the twists in the trailers?
Who made Matt Smith in 2026? How could he be the product and manifestation of Skynet in that timeline when he was a direct result of Genisys, which was an entirely different timeline? How was his model the newest one on the line even though the Resistance had yet to encounter anything beyond the T-800? Did Skynet in this timeline skip over the T-1000? What about the T-1000(s) that were sent back in time to kill Sarah?
etcetera, etcetera, etcetera
18 2015-05-18 16:17:09
Re: Last movie you watched (2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Movie of the year, every year.
19 2015-05-17 09:04:22
Re: Mad Max: Fury Road (obligatory spoiler warning) (92 replies, posted in Off Topic)
I've seen it twice, once in 2D and once in 3D. While the 3D itself is fine, the brightness loss is abysmal and ruins the look of the movie as far as I'm concerned - especially the night time sequence.
20 2015-05-01 22:49:32
Re: Avengers 2: Spader Neutered (28 replies, posted in Off Topic)
Teague wrote:
First, I can't think of anyone on Earth who stands a snowball's chance of getting hired to write / direct Avengers 3 and being given the kind of reign a director almost has to be given in order to tie a movie together out of it. Like, anybody — any other human on Earth being given that amount of freedom and responsibility. Only Kevin Feige himself, maybe, might be able to get that amount of responsibility, once. Everyone else — name a director, even a huge director — is going to be backseat-driven like a motherfucker by an impossible number of interests and cooks in the kitchen.
The only guy who could tell everyone to fuck off.
In all seriousness, I'll post my full thoughts later but I was incredibly underwhelmed by the whole movie.
21 2015-03-06 06:14:22
Re: Announcement: Goodnight, Goodnight! (152 replies, posted in Episodes)
I've been pretty much AWOL for the past year or two because of commitments all over the place but this board was always a treasure to occasionally lurk for great discussions about movies and storytelling. It's disappointing to hear that you guys will no longer be recording stuff but I've always found the forum to be far more engaging; not that the podcasts are bad or anything, but I enjoy the long and informed discussions between multiple people. As such, I'm glad you guys are keeping it around because if this were a true "we're completely done, everything is getting shut down", then I would be far more distraught. Truth be told, I haven't listened to a full commentary since late 2012, so I have a ton of catching up to do. It sucks you never got to the big one I always wanted to hear, Predator, but there's more enough commentaries to keep myself, and everyone else, very entertained for a long time.
22 2014-08-10 00:18:03
Topic: Will Somebody Please Explain This Shit? (17 replies, posted in Off Topic)
One of my favorite films as a teenager was Sin City. I still enjoy it to this day but as a teenager it had everything I could ever want in a movie - gratuitous sex and violence, sly dialogue, badass characters, intertwining plots, and a unique look unlike anything I had ever seen before. I had no idea the film was almost entirely CGI aside from the actors until I saw behind-the-scenes footage a few months after viewing the movie. Obviously, I'm a more "skilled" viewer now than I was at 16, but to this day, I'm still awestruck by the way everything meshes together in Sin City to create a seamlessly blended world. There are very few, if any, shots with jarring elements that seem fake or out of place with everything else. If you haven't seen the movie, or need a reminder, here are a couple of scenes that demonstrate what I'm talking about:
I've eagerly been anticipating a sequel to the film as soon as I learned about, and eventually read, the multiple unadapted stories from the comics. Finally, after nearly ten years since the original was released, the sequel will hit theaters in two weeks. All the elements that made me love original look to be intact - gratuitous sex and violence, sly dialogue, badass characters, intertwining plots and a unique look. The only problem about the unique look is that the blended world of the original has been replaced by a cheap and fake looking world with multiple jarring elements. Here is a clip:
The backgrounds still look fairly good but the muzzle flashes and blood splatters look like shitty and cheap effects plug-ins. Perhaps most jarring of all are the prosthetics on Mickey Rourke. Instead of an exaggerated but believable jaw line, chin, and forehead, his face now looks like it was stung by a swarm of bees. I would think that nearly a decade later the effects would look slightly better than the original, not drastically worse. The extreme contrast in quality has left me with a ton of questions:
Why does everything look worse?
Is it the budget? I can't find budget info but I doubt it's significantly less than the original ($40 million).
Do high quality visual effects cost significantly more now than they did a decade ago?
Did the quality of digital cameras drop off a cliff? The original was all shot on digital and looks fine.
Did Robert Rodriguez go senile? A lot of his recent efforts have suffered from shoddy visual effects.
Did Rourke get more plastic surgery and fuck up the makeup as a result?
Did blood splatters and muzzle flashes become harder to create?
Are the effects actually worse or am I just looking at the original with rose-tinted glasses?
Is it just me? Does everything look fine to everyone else?
I'm hoping someone here can clear up my confusion because I'm at a complete loss for answers.
23 2014-07-19 23:28:36
Re: Attack of the Clones (56 replies, posted in Episodes)
Eddie wrote:
Ewing wrote:"Many rituals held Sand People society together. In many tribes, adolescent Sand People were tasked with a ritual known as "bloodrite", in which a youth proved their hunting skills by capturing a creature and fatally torturing it with techniques extending the pain for weeks before death." - Some fucking stupid EU compendium that was never cannon to begin with and even if it was WHO GIVES TWO SHITS
Fixed it for you.
More disinfo from the Tusken Raider apologists of the New Republic.
24 2014-07-18 22:19:47
Re: Attack of the Clones (56 replies, posted in Episodes)
redxavier wrote:
There's no evidence that 1) Shmi is raped to death or that 2) their rite of passage is to kidnap, rape and kill somesone....
"Many rituals held Sand People society together. In many tribes, adolescent Sand People were tasked with a ritual known as "bloodrite", in which a youth proved their hunting skills by capturing a creature and fatally torturing it with techniques extending the pain for weeks before death."
25 2014-07-18 06:10:49
Re: Attack of the Clones (56 replies, posted in Episodes)
fireproof78 wrote:
Well, is that not the principle behind Species 8472 is to establish a force that actually is harmful to the Borg and makes us more sympathetic?
Personally, I'm going with a bias here of those who present the material. Because, in one view, we see the Borg who assimilate entire cultures in the name of perfection, or their view of it, and that is shown as villainous behavior. I'm really not inclined to argue against that point of view.
However, we are later presented with Species 8472, a force bent on destroying all life not like them. Despite the fact that the Borg are the aggressors, the point of view is one of sympathy as the Borg are facing annihilation. However, given previous encounters with the Borg, should we really be sympathetic?
Is Tatooine a part of the New Republic? Is was only a part of the Empire in name only, really.
Also, my question still remains, we are not Anakin and Anakin is not the average, everyday, person. He is a Jedi. Should a different standard be applied?
I don't pay attention to the psychotic adventures and ramblings that come from the Voyager mission. Remember that time they said traveling faster than light would turn you into a salamander? You might as well reference stories from The Onion.
Tatooine is a part of the New Republic in the sense that the New Republic is now the dominant regime in the galaxy.
No, a different standard shouldn't be applied when it comes to dealing with rapists who literally fuck people to death. Treating them with mercy would be vastly more immoral than swiftly ending their parasitic existence.