You are not logged in. Please login or register.
But then people will STILL POST BROKEN LINKS!! Don't you see?!
I'm not the crazy one here.
Gotta fix it, gotta fix em all, links can't be broken, links gotta work, gotta see the pictures. NOT CRAZY
Last edited by BigDamnArtist (2013-10-25 03:22:33)
You are not crazy.....obsessed,controlling and a wee bit annoying* but NOT crazy.
*about the broken links thing
Last edited by Jimmy B (2013-10-25 04:50:12)
Not crazy at all.
Now, stay on your side of the Internets...
My side, your side. My side, your side!
+4
I'm gonna join BDA on his side of the internet, 'cause that Preview button is there for a reason.
Last edited by Cotterpin Doozer (2013-10-26 04:16:26)
+1
OUR ARMY WILL RISE!!! ALL YOUR HOTLINKS WILL WOOOOOOORRRRK!!! HAAAAHAAAAHHAAAAAAA!!!!
Last edited by BigDamnArtist (2013-10-26 05:26:07)
And if BDA was Admin and not just 'one of us', I'm sure people would care and actually listen to his orders and not just roll our eyes at his hissy fits. 
Meh, I don't think it's too much to ask for people to ensure their pictures/videos/gifs actually work before posting them.
Meh, I don't think it's too much to ask for people to ensure their pictures/videos/gifs actually work before posting them.
Of course it's not 
ALL YOUR HOTLINKS ARE BELONG TO US!!!!! YOU HAVE NO CHANCE TO SURVIVE MAKE YOUR TIME!!!! HAAAAHAAAAHHAAAAAAA!!!!
Fixed it for you.
Last edited by sellew (2013-10-26 15:28:25)
I still have no idea what that's from and the only part I know is All Your Base Belong To Us, and that's only cause a friend of mine in high school used it CONSTANTLY.
I still have no idea what that's from and the only part I know is All Your Base Belong To Us, and that's only cause a friend of mine in high school used it CONSTANTLY.
It's from a Sega Mega Drive game called Zero Wing, which was famous for having an opening sequence which was notoriously badly translated from Japanese. Being a huge Monty Python fan as well as professionally interested in language, I just can't get enough of stuff like that.
+1
What you say!!?
Meh, I don't think it's too much to ask for people to ensure their pictures/videos/gifs actually work before posting them.
Well that's hardly a controversial opinion, which is ironic for this Topic. Technically, Jimmy B's comments are more relevant to this thread. 
+1
Well, if my comments were opinions on film, that would be the case. Stating that BDA is not Admin, therefore people don't have to listen to him give orders is the truth*. It is also why I like to wind him up sometimes but it's all in good fun and BDA has taken it as such
*even if he is right
avatar wrote:I'm waiting for someone to defend Transformers, Adam Sandler, M. Night Shyamalan, Damon Lindelof, Episode 1, and the Wayans.
C'mon - which bozo is gonna say they're underrated?
[cracks knuckles]
[cracks neck]
[jumps up in place a couple times]
Alright, let's do this.
I enjoy watching the entire Transformers trilogy. I do not enjoy Michael Bay's (or the writer's?) sense of humor and I think he needs to fire his editor and hire someone with a less music video, trendy style. (Or shut up and leave his editor the hell alone).
Underrated is not the right word for the trilogy. Plenty of people love them. Filmmakers, geeks and old school Transformers fans hate them. I think starting from Sam leaving Carlie to investigate the Decepticon movements in Dark of the Moon until the end is some of Michael Bay's finest work. The highway chase, the Mexican standoff, Ironhide's death (I almost cried), the Decepticon invasion, the space shuttle explosion, Sam saving Carlie, the paratroopers, surviving the falling building, death of Starscream (aka how a human killed a Leader Class) and omg, Optimus vs. Sentinel, not to mention the best line of the series:
"After all, who would you be without me, Prime?"
"Time to find out." [CLANK]
I was edge of my seat the entire time, totally gripped by the character moments in the films, human and robot alike.
Revenge of the Fallen is the biggest mess, obviously, but the action is still spectacular and the story they were going for was good enough. Less college, more "the last Prime", kthx.
I like to imagine what that movie would be like without Leo.
The original film was the best way to tell the story, a boy and his car, but I wish they'd skipped out on the CIA/hacker storyline. Sam and the soldiers was all we needed.
A big argument I'd see is that the humans were the main characters, not the Transformers, but I think that's partially comes from storytelling, but also practicality. Good luck affording/rendering the VFX on a film where the bots are the main character in almost every scene.
The main plot was a good story, I enjoyed it.
So, I have tons of nitpicky things that irk me every time I watch them, but overall, I think they picked the right director for the job. Otherwise, it'd have come out like Green Lantern or Airbender, I'm sure of it. The franchise would have been done after the first film, who knows if it'd have been given a second chance. It was not exactly a high-art source material they were working with, but I think they took that silly cartoon and made it into something truly special.
Though, I am getting curious to see what someone else would with it now that the precedent has been set.
As for Episode I, any time it comes up I will offer the opinion that it is a great sci-fi movie and a terrible Star Wars film and leave it at that.
Last edited by Vapes (2013-10-27 04:42:51)
Classic Vapes.
Episode 1 is still bad even if it isn't a star wars movie. I wanna see your reasoning here.
Funny, of the three prequels I'd say that Ep1 *feels* the most like a Star Wars movie.
As for Episode I, any time it comes up I will offer the opinion that it is a great sci-fi movie and a terrible Star Wars film and leave it at that.
Except that half its major problems have nothing to do with it being a Star Wars movie. For example, as the guys discussed at length on the commentary—the bad guys don't do anything bad. Also, awful dialogue, awful "comic relief", a twenty-minute racing sequence that kills the pacing, etc. etc.
I still maintain that the first Transformers movie is a fairly enjoyable adaptation of an inherently RETARDED, cartoony concept (a concept that was invented to sell toys to children). It could've been a lot worse (and it's gotten a lot worse in the sequels).
I still maintain that the first Transformers movie is a fairly enjoyable adaptation of an inherently RETARDED, cartoony concept (a concept that was invented to sell toys to children). It could've been a lot worse (and it's gotten a lot worse in the sequels).
In terms of just stupid fun, I recall enjoying the first Transformers; I knew what I was getting into when I watched it, and with that in mind I had no expectations to meet. Still haven't seen the second one and don't plan to; I ended up being dragged to the third by some friends and remember pretty much zip about it.
Vapes wrote:As for Episode I, any time it comes up I will offer the opinion that it is a great sci-fi movie and a terrible Star Wars film and leave it at that.
Except that half its major problems have nothing to do with it being a Star Wars movie. For example, as the guys discussed at length on the commentary—the bad guys don't do anything bad. Also, awful dialogue, awful "comic relief", a twenty-minute racing sequence that kills the pacing, etc. etc.
I can honestly say that I agree with Vapes (probably did so on tf.n several times over the years). I can recall, after seeing the film the first time, thinking "That was ok, but it wasn't really a Star Wars movie." I sat down, at the tender age of 13, and figured that if you took out things like R2 and 3Po, etc, that it would be a serviceable movie. Not a great film, or even a good film, but a manageable movie. Really, like an Asylum film.
I don't hate the prequels (though I have a low opinion of ROTS) but never struck me the same way the OT did. Instead, they just kind of exist as cool digital projects that really don't impact the way I view the OT.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go curl up with "http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Splinter_of_the_Mind%27s_Eye 
I really like The Lady in the Water and I don't think it deserves its 24% rating on Rotten Tomatoes or its reputation as a shitty film.
Sure it's got it's problems, but the movie mostly suffers from having too many ideas rather than too few, and this would not be a bad problem to have if Shyamalan had been willing to approach the script with an editing eye (ie, listen to Disney). In any case, this movie is overwhelmingly about Paul Giamatti and his relationship with the people around him, and that part of it is just excellently done. Weighting the good against the bad, I'd say there's quite a bit more of the former than the latter.
Dorkman wrote:I approve of this message and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
I had a feeling that little opinion would bring all the boys to the yard. I'm fine with people telling me I'm full of shit with it, but I would love for them to tell me how I'm wrong, exactly.
The thing is that Scorcese, much like Spike Lee, brought a previously underrepresented group to the forefront with his early movies. Part of Scorcese's contribution to cinema is that he began his career as a unique voice, and seemed to be bursting with stories and ideas that you were not going to find elsewhere. He went on to have a largely hit or miss career, but you can't touch his early stuff for what it brought to the table.
Cuaron is a fine director, but a lot of his success rests on his ability to elevate otherwise worthless popcorn flicks like Gravity.
I'll argue that DeNiro's performances in Taxi Driver and Raging Bull are worth more than Cuaron's entire filmography.
+1
Firstly, let me requalify my statement. "Pound for Pound," means based on greatness vs output. Charon has made 6 films. Six. They were all awesome in varying degree (I go to bat quite often for Great Expectations). No one is discrediting Scorcesse's skill nor his importance to the time. But amongst Scorcesse's better films are his not so great films, which Cuaron has yet to make.
Secondly, the straw man of "Cuaron built on the shoulders of..." Is equally applicable to Scorcesse and filmmaker like Goddard and Truffaut for which he famously gives credit to. I'm not here to discuss his place in history. Scorsese still makes films during the time Cuaron does, hence the comparison.
Thirdly, I would argue that DeNiro could have given an equally good performance with a few other directors. Directors can help guide performances, but they are not solely responsible for them.
Last edited by Eddie (2013-10-28 15:55:07)
+3
I just think it's more than a bit premature to make that kind of statement, Scorcese has 20 years of movies on Cuaron, and he's still had some really good ones the last decade. If in 20 years Cuaron has still had nothing but hits, then we can talk, but statistically speaking he's probably going to have some bad movies down the line, it's just what happens. It's just way too early to make this kind of comparison one way or the other.
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 9 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
