26

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Invid wrote:

I had to show the trailer to my older cousin (he's around 56) just for the line "No woman can truly love a man who listens to Phil Colins." To be fair, Genesis did some bad albums around that time (as well as some great ones ^_^)

Don't know if this belongs over in "Dubious musical taste", but I wouldn't even go that far.  Some not great songs maybe, but Duke through the self-titled '83 album are pretty solid.  And this is just an amazing song.  He's not responsible for what happened afterwards.

27

(985 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Invid wrote:

As always, if you don't like Doctor Who, come back in three years. Everyone in front and behind the camera will be different.

Praise be to all-powerful Athiesmo!  Steven Moffat is leaving Doctor Who.  He's being replaced by one Chris Chibnall.

[The fine print:  it's not until the end of next season, and none of the previous Doctor Who episodes that he's written ring any bells with me (42, The Hungry Earth, Cold Blood, Dinosaurs on a Spaceship, The Power of Three), meaning that, when I was catching up, they must have been among the ones I skipped over because the internet told me they sucked.]

28

(85 replies, posted in Off Topic)

So, looks like CBS decided to go after the Axanar people after all

I really haven't been following this, but I remember hearing about the Indiegogo campaign.  All seems a bit of a shame as it sounded like it was being done people who actually 'get' what Star Trek is, as seemingly distinct from people in charge of things lately.

(Hasn't helped that I went back and saw ST:ID for the first time since the theater the other week and was really caught off-guard by how much I completely fucking hated every single god damn minute of the thing.)

Completely agree with your assessment, Zarban.  Was really curious to see how it played out given all the apparently negative buzz and quite enjoyed it.  Kids (and wife) liked it enough to get on blu-ray for Christmas. 

Funnily enough, the only other MCU film we liked enough to buy on blu-ray besides the two Avengers movies (because Joss Whedon) is Guardians, the other one that was supposed to be a big risk, which raises two important questions:  (a) can nothing now stop the Marvel juggernaut? and (b) is this actually a good result -- that risk-taking seems to have been rewarded -- given that we're going to have these movies shoveled at us for the foreseeable future?   

I suppose the one thing that kind of irked me just a bit is the rather broad way the 'ethnic' characters are used for comic relief.  It coulda been worse, yeah of course.

And what the heck is up with San Francisco?  It feels like it's suddenly everywhere (Big Hero 6, Inside Out, Ant-Man, The Man In The High Castle).

Zarban wrote:

The de-aging effect on Michael Douglas for early scenes is stunning

And in ironic contrast to the terrible old-age makeup/effect on Martin Donovan (Mitchell Carson), who really is almost 60 years old, but basically hasn't aged a day since his films with Hal Hartley in the 90's.  He must have a painting in an attic somewhere.

avatar wrote:

https://heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/star-wars-cast-luke-skywalker.jpg

Caption Competition...

"We will sell no wine before its time."

I know, another old people's reference, but with my avatar how could I not? [Edit:  Or how 'bout "Miss Tracy, prepare the standard 'rich and famous' contract for Rey and company."]

31

(85 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Does anybody else hear the phrase "Star Trek Beyond" and immediately expect a ska instrumental to start up?  "Don't watch that, watch this!" indeed.

32

(6 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Trey wrote:

When Joel created the show, Mike Nelson was still a waiter at TGI Fridays.  Mike is a talented fella, but he wasn't always the head writer - he started as the writing room assistant.   
It's fine to prefer the direction the show took when Mike did become the head writer.

To be fair though, that's apparently the overwhelming majority of the show's run.  According to IMDB, Mike became head writer starting with the second Comedy Central season (September 1990).  That was more than three years before he actually became the show's host (October 1993). 

I have to confess, host-wise, I lean more Joel than Mike, but partly that's because I'm just not as familiar with his run.  I sort of 'grew up' with the Season 2-4 Turkey Day marathons at a friend's house (the cable company where I lived was too cheap to carry Comedy Central).  Those are still some of my favorites.  I think the one that got me hooked was Wild Rebels, but I could watch Master Ninja 1 forever.

33

(85 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Zarban wrote:

Here are some ideas:

[....]

An all-girl band travels the galaxy performing for Starfleet audiences and any other gig that pays the bills.

You say that, but in one of the extras on the Enterprise DVDs, Brannon Braga says that one studio exec was really pushing for the ship to have another "Ten-Forward"-type area, and each week they'd feature some new band that Paramount/Viacom/Whoever needed to pimp. 

I had a lot more sympathy for Berman & Braga after watching those making-ofs (in the sense that it was greater than zero).

34

(169 replies, posted in Episodes)

It's certainly good to see Star Wars apparently back on a more even keel.  I'm afraid I'm right in the generation of people who were hit hardest by the prequel trilogy, so I'm naturally very wary.  (The originals came out when I was between 8 and 14, I had the Death Star Action Playset, etc. and I was really, really excited about Phantom Menace.)

Darth Praxus wrote:

I absolutely love that J.J. is playing on the concept that the OT is the new characters' storybook/myth just as much as it's ours.

Yeah this is one of the things that still kinda bugs me though, going back to the prequel trilogy.  It's not like nobody's made this point before, but if these people's lives are on anything like a human scale, length-wise, why does *anybody* doubt the power of the Jedi, the Force, etc.?  There should be people still alive who remember the Jedi as an epic peace-keeping force who used lightsabers, clouded men's minds (tm), threw boulders from place to place etc.  So it's *our* myth of course, but it doesn't make any sense to me that it should be *their* myth. 

It's like saying "OMG, that mythical, ancient band Nirvana -- THEY REALLY EXISTED!!!!"  Uh, yeah, they did.

35

(985 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I was wondering whether this thread would ever come back, seeing as the title appeared to have been answered ("Uh, no.")  smile  However, you give me hope Faldor. 

I haven't been able to check it out yet, since my wife says "hell no!" whenever I suggest firing it up on iPlayer, but I'm sure I'll get to it soon. If it's not awful.....

Herc wrote:

Marlon Brando

Got a 2-for-1 special on this one:

Dennis Hopper - Apocalypse Now
Mickey Rourke - Rumble Fish
Diner - Kevin Bacon / Diner - Steve Guttenberg
Lavalantula - Trey Stokes

Let's see...my last one went so well. How about Jeff Bridges. [Forgot about the obvious Marlon Brando connection with my previous choice.]

Henry Fonda

Once Upon A Time In The West - Woody Strode
Spartacus - Stanley Kubrick
Eyes Wide Shut - Tom Cruise
A Few Good Men - Kevin Bacon

[edit: not sure if directors count or not. If not, best I think I can do is

Once Upon A Time In The West - Jason Robards
All The President's Men - Robert Redford
Spy Game - Brad Pitt
Inglourious Basterds - Michael Fassbender
X-Men First Class - Kevin Bacon

There's gotta be a shorter one though.]

And piggy-backing on Trey's answer for Trey:

How The West Was Won - Agnes Moorehead
Citizen Kane - Orson Welles
The Muppet Movie - Michael Earl
Team America - Trey Stokes

And just 'cause I saw The Man Frum UNCLE last night, how about Hugh Grant

So, they've already greenlit a sequel, and are apparently looking to replicate the juggernaut that is the Sharknado franchise.
 
http://deadline.com/2015/07/lavalantula … 201486713/

More opportunity to see Trey's astounding supervision, I hope!

39

(985 replies, posted in Off Topic)

sellew wrote:

Not to go around stirring up apathy or anything, but a quick look at Wikipedia shows 5 episodes written by Moffat, one co-written by Moffat and two by Peter 'Kill The Moon' Harness.  Sigh.

Wait, I just noticed that I misread the Wikipedia page.  It's only four solo episodes by Moffat! (I'd mistakenly included the Christmas episode.)  We're saved!! 


Or not.

40

(985 replies, posted in Off Topic)

This is the show I was promised, and I'm still waiting for it:


Not to go around stirring up apathy or anything, but a quick look at Wikipedia shows 5 episodes written by Moffat, one co-written by Moffat and two by Peter 'Kill The Moon' Harness.  Sigh.


But, hey -- if a guy dressed like this can make one of my favorite records of all time, anything's possible.

http://princereviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/princeparademovie.jpg

41

(96 replies, posted in Movie Stuff)

Yep.  Sounds like a plan.

I'm actually enjoying trying to think of five films.  In a way I'm finding it harder than I thought I would.  There's plenty of films that I think should be better known/more widely appreciated, like if you all came over to my house or something I would make you watch them, but it's interesting to really think about "OK, what films do I really feel like discussing (and why)?"

42

(96 replies, posted in Movie Stuff)

Hey everybody.  Sorry to have missed this little discussion (last month or so of life has been crazy -- which is why I missed the last couple of films), but I actually have another suggestion for how we could pick the films.  It's a little complicated, but here's my thinking:

Like BDA, I would really like to see this keep going.  I know the original idea partly was to find out about cool films that you might not have thought about checking out, but I think the best way to keep things going is (at least intially) picking films that as many of us as possible would like to see.  With the best will in the world, it's easy when real life begins to intervene to say "yeah, I'm not sure I have time to do that", but if it's a film that you actually have been meaning to see, there's an incentive to make time.

So here's what I suggest:  everybody who wants to participate submits a list of five suggested films, with a little blurb or tagline to pimp it if desired.  Everybody then votes for their top five choices -- five points for first choice, four for second, etc.

However, there's an important catch:  you can only vote for films that are on someone else's list.  If there's an overlap between you and someone else, that's fine, but you can't vote for something that appears only on your own list.  We tally the votes, and the top five winners are the five we do next.

That will push us a bit toward the mainstream maybe, but it'll mean hopefully that for each film there will be at least a few people who *really* want to see it, and that'll be enough to keep things going. 

What do y'all think? (Obviously we keep going with Reign of Fire for the moment.)

43

(9 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Eddie wrote:

Nestle makes Dasani brand bottled water and sources their water in California.  They have no intention of slowing down.

Ah, Dasani.  Did their PR fiasco in the UK ten years or so ago ever make it back to the States?  That was one of the most beautiful things I've ever seen.  It was very quickly withdrawn and never came back.

Basically, bottled water over here is actual spring water -- that is, water taken from some actual mountain stream or whatever somewhere.  There's no concept of 'manufactured' bottled water, except one: a famous episode of the sitcom Only Fools And Horses, about a couple of loveable get-rich-quick scam artists, where they bottle water out of their tap and sell it as "Peckham Springs" mineral water.  And just to top it all off, the Dasani plant was literally about 5 miles from where the show was supposedly set.  The media had a field day.

Wikipedia also tells me that at launch their UK website redirected to the US one, which called the product 'bottled spunk' and contained animated slogans like 'Can't live without spunk!'. 'Spunk' is UK slang for 'semen'.

Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of people (see also: third world infant formula).

44

(11 replies, posted in Movie Stuff)

Squiggly_P wrote:

Criterion is the only real reason to have a hulu plus account. Almost all of them are on there.

Cue a glare of bitterness from everybody living outside Region A.

My only legal option is about $15 for a standard def DVD.  Here's what dvdbeaver says about it: 

dvdbeaver.com wrote:

Well, this is another fine mess - not 'progressively encoded'  and converted directly from an NTSC source (see times). Non-removable English subtitles. But this is only the start - halos, ghosting and combing are rife throughout the presentation. Thick black borders are around the image not fully utilizing the horizontal resolution....Only thing we can say about it is it won't look that bad on a regular tube TV.

Fortunately my *ahem* local public library, shall we say, had a copy.

45

(11 replies, posted in Movie Stuff)

Only managed to watch the first hour so far, but really love it, and definitely want to get to it but have been really busy as well. 

On what I've seen, I totally agree with bullet3 that the periodic tableaus (tableaux?) of people in the apartment are amazing compositionally -- looking all in slightly different directions, across each other, etc.  And for any experts on mid-20th century Japanese criminal law:  it's not extortion if it's not a family member?  Really?

46

(28 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Doctor Submarine wrote:

And honestly, this movie makes me think that calling Whedon a really great writer might be giving him too much credit. Pick any individual dialogue scene out of this movie and it's great. But structurally this film is a damn nightmare. It's bafflingly minimalist, with each shot and scene whittled down to be as short as possible while still conveying the information. I understood what was going without much trouble, but the movie feels like a "previously on" segment, quickly getting across all its plot information without doing much of anything else.

I see where you're coming from, but I think I'm with Teague on this one.  I'm 100% sure that the film is not the way it is because Joss Whedon thought that that was the best way to tell the story he wanted to tell.  It's because his masters need him to shoehorn about 85 gajillion other things into the story he wanted to tell, and he's gotta find some way to do it.  It's a miracle that it's not a trainwreck.

During the opening battle scene though, all I could think of was Trey complaining about having the Phase 1 movies get messed up because of the need to be Avengers commercials, and then having to "wait 30 goddamn minutes for the Avengers to show up in their own goddamn movie", or words to that effect.  I hope he was happy.   smile

Doctor Submarine wrote:

It's fun, sure. Funny. But it's also the most crassly produced thing Marvel's put out to date. I'm officially done with these movies.

Funnily enough, again I see what you mean but I had kind of a positive reaction.  I was thinking "You know what? These now actually really feel like comic books" in the sense of different things going on in different books which sometimes overlap (especially having the Agents of SHIELD episode directly preceding).  I could almost see the asterisk in the dialogue and the text box at the bottom of the panel "As seen in Defenders #35, on sale now! -- Librarian Len", etc. etc.  Made me feel kind of pleasantly nostalgic. 

And I can't be done with these movies until at least after Ant Man.  I'm really curious about the negative buzz.  It'll be interesting to see what that amounts to.  (And we may find out how much of a good writer Joss Whedon really is.)

47

(34 replies, posted in Episodes)

Cool!  Ta very much, Teague!

48

(34 replies, posted in Episodes)

Actually, while we're on the subject of Malariathon 'bonus material' for the Special Edition version:

1.  Teague, you don't by any chance have a big, hi-rez version of the scheduling graphic, do you?  The circular one with the films and projected times, etc.?  I always thought that was really beautiful, and would make a nice poster if your original was big enough to be blown up.

2.  I'm probably the only one, but I was faffing around with downloading Chrome and figuring out how Google Hangouts worked for so long that I missed basically all of the "Greatest Hits" montage that was playing before you guys started.  That'd be neat to hear if anybody has it lying around. 

3.  Eddie's recipes?  I know he got tied up with Fighting in Plain Sight stuff right after the Malariathon, but the food he was doing sounded absolutely delicious.

4.  Did anything ever happen with the codes from the chat? 

Totally don't mean to sound all "gimme, gimme, gimme", but I sort of went "hey, it would be neat to see about that, oh and then there was that, and yeah I always meant to ask about that", etc. etc. etc.

49

(4 replies, posted in Movie Stuff)

OK, right.  So:

Me in the other thread wrote:

Not being a fan of horror movies particularly, I don't have lots of context for this film (though I could swear that I saw it on home video like 25 years ago, but apparently remembered nothing about it).  However, I think it would be good in a double-bill with Cabin in the Woods (which I've also never seen, though I know it by reputation, and really want to see it now), just because it seems like The Evil Dead could be the beginning of the postmodern, for lack of a better word, trend in horror (with Cabin in the Woods being its culmination).

It's hugely self-conscious and (self-)referential.  That's definitely what struck me the most.  In the cellar there's what must be a bit of theatrical poster for Wes Craven's The Hills Have Eyes; Ash does the old mirror gag from Jean Cocteau's Orphée (see also The Matrix); the ridiculously OTT sequence with the projector in the cellar shining on Ash which gradually gets covered in blood.  (Geez, how more meta can you get?)

Of the horror/exploitation films that preceded this, I've only seen Romero's two zombie movies and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (and all a long time ago), but I don't remember any of them being explicitly self-regarding in this way.  Dawn of the Dead has some comedy and social commentary, for example, but this is something else entirely.

Normally I find all that crap unbelievably annoying (which is largely why I'm not a fan of The Princess Bride), but I actually don't mind it here.  Maybe that's partly because I'm not really well-versed in the genre, so it seems fresher, but I'm sure part of it is the the obvious enthusiasm that Sam Raimi brings to the material.  I really do get a sense of glee from the direction and the again OTT makeup effects.

I suppose the thing that's the biggest letdown is the script and the characterization.  The actors don't seem to be much more than props that move around (maybe not hugely surprising, given where Raimi's interests obviously lie).  It's like the script doesn't bother even with the cliched genre-staple characterizations.  That's actually another reason why I really now want to see Cabin in the Woods -- to see what Whedon/Goddard do with this idea in terms of the characters (though they apparently have other fish to fry in terms of heading off into the meta-stratosphere).

50

(96 replies, posted in Movie Stuff)

Not being a fan of horror movies particularly, I don't have lots of context for this film (though I could swear that I saw it on home video like 25 years ago, but apparently remembered nothing about it).  However, I think it would be good in a double-bill with Cabin in the Woods (which I've also never seen, though I know it by reputation, and really want to see it now), just because it seems like The Evil Dead could be the beginning of the postmodern, for lack of a better word, trend in horror (with Cabin in the Woods being its culmination). 

It's hugely self-conscious and (self-)referential.  That's definitely what struck me the most.  In the cellar there's what must be a bit of theatrical poster for Wes Craven's The Hills Have Eyes; Ash does the old mirror gag from Jean Cocteau's Orphée (see also The Matrix); the ridiculously OTT sequence with the projector in the cellar shining on Ash which gradually gets covered in blood.  (Geez, how more meta can you get?)

Of the horror/exploitation films that preceded this, I've only seen Romero's two zombie movies and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (and all a long time ago), but I don't remember any of them being explicitly self-regarding in this way.  Dawn of the Dead has some comedy and social commentary, for example, but this is something else entirely. 

Normally I find all that crap unbelievably annoying (which is largely why I'm not a fan of The Princess Bride), but I actually don't mind it here.  Maybe that's partly because I'm not really well-versed in the genre, so it seems fresher, but I'm sure part of it is the the obvious enthusiasm that Sam Raimi brings to the material.  I really do get a sense of glee from the direction and the again OTT makeup effects. 

I suppose the thing that's the biggest letdown is the script and the characterization.  The actors don't seem to be much more than props that move around (maybe not hugely surprising, given where Raimi's interests obviously lie).  It's like the script doesn't bother even with the cliched genre-staple characterizations.  That's actually another reason why I really now want to see Cabin in the Woods -- to see what Whedon/Goddard do with this idea in terms of the characters (though they apparently have other fish to fry in terms of heading off into the meta-stratosphere). 


Week 2 :: 6 :: sellew :: Solaris (2002)
Duncan Jones, but with a little more money.  How does this film only have a 6.2 rating on IMDB?