351

(93 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Oh boy indeed. I understand you like this movie, but you're really reaching with these explanations smile


Doctor Submarine wrote:

We don't need a scene showing kaiju blood being toxic because they told us in the exposition-heavy prologue that it is. Showing is better than telling, but if you've already told then showing is redundant. Also, Idris Elba says that Perlman's team neutralizes the toxicity before going in for the remains. Not entirely justified, but not without logic.

Hey, you brought it up as a justification of why the Jaegars weren't using their most effective weapons. If that's the case, the film needs to make it the reason and show it. What the film does show is a callous disregard for collateral damage, so I'm not really sure how that's supposed to fly.

Doctor Submarine wrote:

The beast is there to destroy the buildings anyway, so damaging them in a fight to kill it isn't ridiculous at all. What, is the kaiju just supposed to rampage around the city and go home?
Charlie Day says pretty early on that the kaiju's plan is to attack the populated areas and take out the "vermin." That line was in the trailers, for god's sake. And we do see them take on a kaiju before it gets to a city in the first scene of the movie. Idris Elba specifically says that their primary priority is to protect the city. And he says it AGAIN before the Hong Kong fight.

You misunderstand, and I may be to blame here. The object is to protect the cities and save lives, right?

Option 1 - allow kaiju into city, not be allowed to use best weapons for fear of toxic blood, fight them ineffectually by punching them, practically destroy entire city in process, many thousands die, many more thousands left homeless and leave - city now a ruin

Option 2 - allow kaiju into city, use best weapons to kill it quickly, toxic blood causes some damage, many thousands leave whilst it's being cleaned up (neutralised even!) then return to city which is mostly still intact, repeat as necessary

Option 3 - kill kaiju before it gets near city with best weapons

Which of these options is the worst for protecting the city? The first. And this appears to be the most common method (all the destroyed Jaegars we see in montage are in cities plus Tokyo and Sydney). Even outside Hong Kong in the sea where they can go all out without fear of collateral damage, the best weapons aren't used and two Jaegars are destroyed because of it (and a kaiju enters the city and destroys much of it).

You can't really argue that Jaegars aren't fighting at their most efficient due to fear of collateral damage (unspecified toxic damage) when the Jaegars are essentially using collateral damage to kill the kaiju.

Killing the kaiju should have been paramount, and that could have been a theme of the story, mankind was essentially turning into beasts themselves to survive. They were cutting off arms to save the body, they were making hard choices about who to save (and none of that stupid 10 vs million choice), and they were turning to increasingly more terrible weapons to get the job done. The one interesting element, that the early pilots had been killing themselves by using the machines, is brushed aside with little exploration.


At this point, I think a comparison is in order. World War Z, the book. The human race is shown as making mistakes at the beginning, and suffers because of it, but they aren't incompetent. They've thought of how to deal with the threat and throughout the world have adapted and developed new tactics to cope, cities have been abandoned as indefensible and new defence lines have been set up, for instance, the Americans have abandoned virtually all of the coastline and retreated to the mountains.

Where is that here? Where is the common sense?

This is a war that has gone on for years (I think about a decade?) and the film instead chooses to portray mankind as idiots who opt for a plan to build a wall as their last resort. Something that would have made sense in the first 2-3 years perhaps when we were still learning and didn't quite know what we were dealing with. It makes it worst that the film presents it as an inevitable failure which the military guys don't even fight against. You know what humans came up with the last time they wanted to end a global war? Nuclear weapons.

So the question is, why does mankind have to be retarded? How does that make for a good story? How does that make the world feel real? Making characters stupid so that plot happens is the worst way to write. You seem to agree that this happens in Prometheus, but remain blind to it here.


Doctor Submarine wrote:

And why weren't there all those weapons? Because this is a movie about giant robots, and the movie where humans efficiently and effectively deal with the kaiju perfectly and without any problems would be boring.

That's the difference between good writing and lazy writing isn't it? You make your story dramatic by giving your villain great powers, not by making your heroes stupid with convenient moments of sense.



What would I have done differently?

I'd have made the story about the search for a way to end the war. Parts of the world have roaming kaijus and others are uninhabitable due to the use of nuclear weapons used early in the war. The US has a defensive line at the Appalachians, behind which everyone has moved. Jaegars work in pairs or squads with support from other branches of the military, kind of like the mechs in Patlabor and Appleseed.  They're loaded down with offensive weaponry. But the problem isn't really the kaiju, even though they're bigger and harder to take down, it's that it's neverending. They just keep coming. Mankind is getting tired, we're running low on materials due to attrition, and we're killing the planet to win.

And I'd have a scene where a Jaegar runs out of ammo and is forced to use the fists, something that no-one has ever done successfully before. This would be the goddamn climax, and like Neo in the Matrix, it would be this "what are you doing, you crazy mofo fuck me what a punch and jesus he uppercut him right in the jaw, and now look he's using a goddamn ship as a bat!" crowning moment of awesome. Instead of the... STOP USELESSLY BLUDGEONING THE CREATURE OVER AND OVER frustration we have now.

Ahem... excuse me.

352

(93 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Yes, they say the blood is toxic but it doesn't come up again, we don't see how toxic it is and what effects it has on people. We just get a brief glimpse that looks like an oil spill. Later Pearlman says that other parts of their corpses are beneficial, so it's not even internally consistent. It's not like it's acidic and melts people.

Further, the logic of not using offensive weapons to kill the kaiju makes zero sense if the Jaeger loses the fight and the kaiju has free rein to destroy the city and kill essentially everyone. One would assume that most people would go underground, and you'd have clean up crews to prevent major damage from some blood... certainly the damage to the city would be a hell of a lot less than the destruction wrought by throwing the beast around into buildings.

And again, why are they being fought in populated areas at all? They clearly have a very effective detection and tracking system in place, yet they can't intercept any of them before they hit the cities?

That's one of the main problems with the film, it portrays humans as stupid, both at the strategic and tactical levels. Same thing with the walls, how anyone could have thought that was going to work is baffling given what the film shows. Why weren't coastal defences set up with plasma cannon emplacements, sort of like a modern Maginot Line? Why wasn't there an high altitude airforce equipped with the powerful missiles? Why wasn't there a laser/missile platform in orbit?

If the world was truly as fleshed out as you say, all these issues would have been addressed in the story. Instead, human beings ignore the flaws of the Jaeger approach (one bright crew thinks that throwing a creature into water will do something to it!), and build a bloody wall.

Also, why didn't Gipsy have a sword at the begining? Why didn't they lead with the arm cannon in that fight?

It's the equivalent of coming up with an ultimate weapon to fight zombies, and it's a boxing glove.

353

(93 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Doctor Submarine wrote:

Co-writer Travis Beacham has a blog, and he's been answering fans' plot nitpicks since release day. Mako didn't use the sword to start with because it would have spilled a lot of toxic Kaiju blood all over the city, so she waited until they were high above the ground.

Why not use the swords in the sea outside of HK though? The other robot had twin blades as well, but chose to punch the monsters instead. Further, kaiju's are repeatedly shown to be fought inside of cities (in fact every fight bar the first is fought near populated areas), so it's not like they were fighting strategically, and I don't remember them actually saying what was so bad about kaiju blood (later, Ron Pearlman says that every part of the buffalo is extremely valuable and useful).

And they sure were high!


I didn't like this one, possibly the worst written big movie in years. It's on the level of Prometheus in how it lacks respect for its own ideas. No-one behind the movie thought through the concepts at all, no-one asked questions about why things were happening and why they happened the way they did. What's most disappointing is how easy it would have been to change this around. Plus, it rips off countless films, from Independence Day to Men in Black to Armageddon.

354

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRfHNOwLOPEDmYeirVTj_PH3f8t0TzHTiQYY9ypsU7Jf83HJZ4J

What a disappointing experience. Moments of awesome wrapped in a poorly reasoned mess of a story.

I honestly can't remember ever questioning the events and motivations of a film so much. The central problem of the story is that the reason for the Jaegers' existence hasn't really been thought out. So we have repetitive  battles, with robots ineffectually punching or throwing around monsters for long stretches, only to pull out a sword at the end or shooting missiles or a plasma cannon that could have been better delivered by other means. And the world around everything's so poorly set and developed, we're apparently led to believe that walls were the better alternative? If you can't build a tank to stand up to an attack, a wall built with essentially the same materials isn't going to do shit either.

It wouldn't be such a problem if they hung a lantern on the ridiculousness of how badly the Jaegers approached the fighting... like in Iron Man 2. "Next time, lead with that!" But that half of the movie seems to take itself too seriously (the Ron Pearlman half is of an entirely different tone).

Thus one of the main plots of the story, the kaiju adapting, is demonstrated really poorly. Why not simply show an arms race developing over the course of the war, with increasingly destructive weapons being employed by the Jaegers against the larger kaijus coming through, weapons that ultimately mean harming our own planet in the long run? Instead, the Jaegers are boxers and wrestlers, the equivalent of a tank trying to run over its opponents instead of firing its main gun. And they don't appear to change at all over the course of the war, other than going digital. What makes a Mark 5 so much better? It falls over once in water and half of its systems fail!

It's not entirely beyond saving, some re-editing and changing of some expositionary dialogue could dramatically improve it.



http://bigfanboy.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Hansel-Gretel-Witch-Hunters-Poster-001.jpg

What a surprise! A fun and ballsy movie with swearing, cool tongue in cheek dialogue and no sense of restraint which make it an unexpected joy. I watched the Extended version, which apparently includes a lot more 'oh shit, no way!' moments. It's definitely superior to Van Helsing.

355

(346 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Just read the news that Scott Carpenter, one of the Original Seven Mercury astronauts, has passed away. He flew only one flight with NASA, on Aurora 7 in May 1962.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Scott-Carpenter_recovery_NASA.jpg

Apparently, John Glenn is now the only one of the original seven still alive.

356

(349 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Eddie wrote:
AshDigital wrote:

You might see a man having fun… all I see is a man not home writing!!

Good.  A writer who does nothing but write and refuses to engage in the world around him or herself is not a writer whose works I want to read.

I think GRRM's about as far to the other end of the spectrum as you can get from doing nothing but write  wink

357

(372 replies, posted in Off Topic)

The Big Lebowski isn't the greatest film ever made. In fact, I have disliked every Coen Brothers film that I've seen, and think they are overrated.

Now I recognise (with the wisdom that my age should bring) that part of my dislike is a habitual reaction to a school friend who was a film snob - he thought they were brilliant and would get very psuedo-analytical about why - but in my defence, The Big Lebowski isn't terribly funny, rips off other better films (including North by Northwest), features the awful John Turturro, and seems to amble along without any real story or message.

Maybe I should watch it again... so I can better defend my opinion. wink

Yeah, she's the blacksmith in A Knight's Tale smile

359

(649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Thanks for letting me come back guys. smile

360

(649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I should be around tomorrow at that time. Off to watch the first episode again.

361

(649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I have mixed feelings about Steam, on one hand, it's a pretty convenient way to get games, but on the other, it's quite intrusive when you're playing a game and gets in the should you be installing from a hardcopy.

Of course, in the wake of Steam, other similar platforms have emerged and these probably annoy me more - Origin is required for Battlefield 3, and I think Far Cry 3 required Uplay or something.

I'm still not sure how to feel about this one. I want to love it, but it's playing hard to get.

363

(649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I'd be down for some gaming ones, and Agents of SHIELD sounds good too. Assuming that my recording sample passed muster of course.

Except that real people don't behave like this, not even close. None of these individuals would function in the real world with how they act towards other people. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's great TV, but non-heroic doesn't equal reality.

Gus points out quite a few times that he doesn't deal with junkies, thinks it's a bad idea, and even repeatedly refers to Jesse specifically as a liability. It's Jesse that stirs up the trouble that ultimately forces Walt into conflict. So yes, I found it really out of character for him to suddenly switch to backing Jesse, even when for all its intents and purposes it was back to business and making boat loads of dosh. Why take the risk when it's made emphatic that the lab needs to be active every day?

Doctor Submarine wrote:

"Frustrating?" How do you mean? I think that season 4 is one of the best seasons of television ever, and definitely Breaking Bad's best.

I found there was a lot of repetition in the character dynamics going on, and felt that we were going over the same territory. Once again, our two leads are at odds with each other, in spite of how they start off having literally killed people for each other. And I found nearly all of the characters became so antagonistic towards each other that a lot of the drama seemed contrived. Walter, especially, vascilates between persuasive and abusive too often and seems to sometimes say stuff just to keep the drama going. Such that the split with Jesse seemed unconvincing to me, since it mostly relied on Jesse's stupidity and naivety (which comes and goes depending on the needs of the plot). Then it seemed to get even more improbable when the only solution a really smart person could conceive was apparently to poison a child and blame it on Gus, which is so batshit crazy I couldn't buy it.

I thought Gus was a good foil, but that he ultimately chose to go with the junkie he wanted killed over the master chemist that wanted to do business was a bit of a reach to me, especially since the only reason why Gus' relationship had broken down with Walt in the first place was due to this same junkie he wanted killed...

The fifth season also had similar problems. Once again, Jesse's going through a long bout of self-pity and depression (except this time I honestly didn't understand why) and again Skylar and Walt are back in the same space (which again gets reversed).

366

(3 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Just saw in the news that this prolithic novelist has died.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24372224

He wrote some great novels, provided some fodder for a few good movies and even some good games too.

Dorkman wrote:

Jesse has just gone through the most unhinged "Scared Straight" program in history. He's not gonna so much as jaywalk for the rest of his life.

Unlikely. If your girlfriend choking to death due to an OD doesn't stop you doing drugs... also, he's clearly speeding!


I thought it was good, and thought season 5 was a big improvement over the frustrating last couple of seasons. I'm the lone voice here I know, but I actually don't think the writing is as good as people think it is, but Bryan Cranston sure can act and that makes up for a lot of the shortcomings.

BigDamnArtist wrote:

Isn't the whole thing about Saruman in LOTR that he actually used to be kinda a cool dude, but then he was corrupted by Sauron and then PLOT TWIST he's actually evil now guys.

Or did I just make that up along the way somewhere?

Nope, you're right on. Gandalf says at one point that Saruman was the greatest and wisest of them all. You get the feeling he really looked up to him. They do sort of show this second aspect in the movies.

Slightly unrelated, but I wish Saruman had been portrayed in a more positive light. I think it would have been much more powerful for the story had he been a good guy here, and not some shady character being a dick to Gandalf and Radaghast.

370

(649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Very nice, guys! I can't believe you've already done 21 episodes, that's impressive too.

371

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Funny, I've seen Kiltro, but damned if I could remember literally anything about it.

Zarban wrote:

Clark Gregson and Whedon's humor elevated this above an episode of Warehouse 13. We'll see what happens next.

Oh my Zarban! That's a very apt comparison.

I know I'm going to spend a lot of my time whilst watching the series expecting/hoping for the AVengers or other MU characters to turn up, and getting all annoyed when they don't.

I really hope they expand the scope of the series in the coming episodes. It feels very limited, what with the base of operations starting out in a small office rather than the helicarrier or similar. Is it always going to be this small team going on missions and working from the small big plane?

Oh thank god/Teague, that was niggling me.

Just saw this, hmm... not completely sold on it. Am I getting old, or does the cast appear to be a bunch of kids?

sellew wrote:

Is Agents of SHIELD endangered already?  Or should the thread title read "Conversation thread"?  tongue

I've not seen it yet but perhaps the agents make jam or something?

375

(83 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Wait, the devil turns up in Passion of the Christ? Wow. (I've not seen it, but didn't think it was that unsubtle!)

Here are a few that spring to my mind:
Sean Connery as John Mason (The Rock).
Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones (Raiders etc.).
Brad Pitt as Tyler Durden (Fight Club).