601

(14 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Marty J wrote:
avatar wrote:

I remember the DVD special feature about the extensive selection process. That's who you cast after sifting through thousands of interviews!?! What were the others like?

Haley Joel Osment was the right age. Why not him, George? Why the fuck not?

Yep. The team from Looper had no trouble finding a capable kid actor either. Had Lucas' casting team just abducted a random kid off the street, the chances that he would have been a worse actor than Jake Lloyd would have been 725 to 1.

602

(14 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Marty J wrote:

Two painfully obvious examples come from the Star Wars prequels:
Jake Lloyd as Anakin Skywalker (IIRC, George Lucas wanted a "real kid" who's not "too good" big_smile )

Good one. I remember the DVD special feature about the extensive selection process. That's who you cast after sifting through thousands of interviews!?! What were the others like?

603

(14 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Denise Richards as nuclear scientist in The World is Not Enough.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jq5MTd0aaps/UOlZf6_oYjI/AAAAAAAAdr4/htM6Cu0tKtU/s1600/Denise+Richards+as+Christmas+Jones.jpg

604

(42 replies, posted in Off Topic)

What match-ups haven't we seen yet?

Robots, Aliens, Sharks, Supervillains, Dinosaurs, Zombies, Vampires, Gangsters, Nazis, Serial Killers, Cannibals,  Mutants, Werewolves, [Insert Animal Name] Man, Cowboys, Barbarians, and Nicholas Cage. (Did I miss any?)

Stick all these names in a bag and pull two or three out... and greenlight.

605

(42 replies, posted in Off Topic)

BigDamnArtist wrote:

For all the bitching we get I'm kinda amazed how how many reboots/sequels are on this page.

That's a good point. A more interesting challenge is come up with three movie ideas that aren't prequels/sequels, reboots, spin-offs, re-imaginings, or even adaptations of books, games, graphic novels. To make it even harder, they can't contain a teenage superhero, or a chosen one, or a third-act 'WWE fight'.
[Dune, for all its highbrow powerpolitics, contains all three of these overused tropes.]

606

(77 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Breaking Bad would be perfect material for a Grand Theft Auto mission pack.

paulou wrote:

Ep commentary with Rian Johnson:

http://www.slashfilm.com/the-ones-who-k … n-johnson/

Did you catch the reference to the fact that Hank & Gomie have been buried in a sacred Indian burial ground which has a curse on it? Expect to see Hank again.

Rob wrote:

I'm still amazed by how careless uncle Jack's choices were.

Jack kills Hank against Walt's pleas, literally helps himself to the guy's fortune, and leaves Walt table scraps in the form of one measly barrel. Jack then presumes that a handshake will (excuse the pun) bury all grudges before sending Walt on his way.

Even a racist dummy like Jack should know that you can't take barrels full of cash from another criminal, or from anyone, and expect that bygones will be bygones.

He doesn't off Walt because of Todd's admiration for Walt. That's basically a sentimental reason for not tying up a loose end, the knot of which would allow you to get away absolutely clean with many millions of dollars. And Jack doesn't seem like a sentimental guy. Can he actually believe that a reluctant handshake from Walt means we're all square?

We know that Jack has contracted to kill people for far less money than is in the barrel he is gifting to Walt. When a barrel-full of millions is at stake, I'd think Jack would just say "My nephew will get over it" and summarily kill Walt. A super-ruthless mofo would have ordered Todd to be the one who kills Walt.

Yep - it would have been more believable if they either had (1) Jack not steal from Walt and honourably keep to the original contract, or (2) be a total a bastard and just take everything and (try to) kill Walt. Obviously, Walt being the main character, he has to get away somehow (hey look over there - is that Adolf?!).

609

(15 replies, posted in Episodes)

I reckon the opening to Mission Impossible II (forget about the rest of the movie) is still up there with anything else in the series...

Check out the jump & slip at 1m:23s

610

(42 replies, posted in Off Topic)

1. Thomas Paine biopic. Richard Attenborough has been trying to make it for years. You'd have the broad canvas of the American Revolution where you juxtapose intellectual ideas about how to set up a new country upon Enlightenment principals against the War of Independence. All the founding fathers would be there.
But that's only first act. Because then Paine goes to Georgian London to participate in the Industrial Revolution. Then he flees to Paris to participate in the French Revolution and witnesses all the jockeying for power among all the factions. Everything is up for grabs. Pertinent parables to today's issues of inequality and the 1% v 99%.
Paine's thrown in jail. Napoleon comes to power, etc. It'd encompass all the grand ideas (abolition of slavery, secularism, social security, democracy, libertarianism, republicanism, egalitarianism, etc)  and massive battles on land and sea, with a cast of hundreds (who's who of 18th century European/American politics). It'd cost $250M+, go on for hours, and probably make no money because it doesn't have teenage superheroes.

2. DUNE. I second that.

3. Captain Cook biopic. There's yet to be a major movie on any real voyage of exploration, and no one did it better than Cook (and he had a suitably dramatic death). Give it the Master & Commander treatment in terms of production values. Recently, Life of Pi and Kon-Tiki showed how to make seafaring cinematic. You could even have the obligatory "And then sharks" sequence. Even more action-packed than Cook is the voyage of Anson in the 1740s which involved multiple shipwrecks, the loss of hundreds of lives, pirating & plundering, mutiny, struggle for survival, exotic cultures, international warfare, etc.

Oxymandias episode the greatest thing since fellatio...

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-enter … 21985.html

I must say the acting on this show is absolutely superb. Aaron Paul, Dean Norris and Jonathan Banks have been revelations. The performances have been the single best aspect of Breaking Bad - better than the writing or production values. Even the frigg'n baby acts!

Trey wrote:

They have no grudge against Walt - he's done plenty for them.  Until that moment they were working for him.   But the job was just to kill one lowlife methhead.  Now with two DEA corpses on their hands, the Bros are in a lot deeper than they planned to be, and decided to compensate themselves accordingly.

However, due to their own code of honor, they offered Walt the choice of walking away with his life plus one barrel of consolation cash - or being the third body.  Walt took the deal.

Yes, they were contracted to Walt. They wanted him to cook for them. I don't see why two dead cops (who they were prepared for and dealt with accordingly) would change the original deal. It was more than just $70M compensation for extra inconvenience. It was robbery. There was no discussion. They even threatened to kill him. Why the sudden change from loyal contractors to stealing from their business partner (and bizarrely allowing him to live). I didn't buy why that change took place. One could just say 'they're gangster nazis - that's how they roll' but they didn't seem duplicitous or capricious before.

bullet3 wrote:

Also, because Todd still really looks up to him. The show smartly planted the seeds for this in that pre-credits diner scene a few episodes back, where Todd is proudly re-telling how awesome Walter White was at the Train Robbery. At the time, I thought the scene seemed a bit throwaway, but it actually turned out to be a brilliant bit of setting the story in motion 4 hours out..

Yes, but it was Jack, not Todd, that made all the decisions about robbing & threatening Walt. In any case, having Walt talked up as a formidable badass only increases the future threat of an aggrieved man. All the more reason to finish him off if you're going to steal his life savings.

I have a question: Why did the Neo-Nazis let Walt live? They've already got two bodies (what's one more?) and the cash and a cook. They know Walt is upset over Hank. They've robbed him, so he's even more upset. Why leave him alive? Walt knows too much. He could anonymously tip off the police, or he could set up a rival operation, or just seek revenge. Jack has no qualms about killing.
(Frankly I'm surprised they robbed Walt - that wasn't the deal, and they seemed loyal to Walt until now, and Walt did nothing wrong to them, but that's another issue.)

Rob wrote:

I've asked a cop about the whole shootout-where-no-one-gets-hit thing in movies. Didn't he think it was ridiculous, I asked, how people sprayed bullets everywhere in that movie but never seemed to hit a damn thing? His response was that Hollywood definitely presents shootouts unrealistically, however, he assured me that in real life shooting someone is not easy. If you're standing two feet away, that's one thing. But if you've got someone who is 10, 20, 25-plus yards away, and they're not stationary, it's actually quite a challenge. "That's why the practice range exists—because it's so hard to hit exactly what you'd like to hit" he said. His larger point was that when you factor in the adrenaline and confusion of the moment, shooting someone at a distance is hard even if you're an excellent shot. He did mention that some weapons are easier to aim than others. Now the most important point: I don't know whether any of that is true because I know nothing about firearms. But I guess it makes sense. It still seems to me that a weapon that sprays rounds all over the place would be nearly fool-proof. But then I've never shot a machine gun. (I was deeply involved with Operation Wolf back in the day, but that's classified.)

I only need to know one thing... where they are...

616

(11 replies, posted in Episodes)

Just heard this commentary after a double screening of Ghostbusters 1 & 2 in London. Four years ago when this was being recorded, the third one seemed imminent. Sounds like it's still some time away... http://www.slashfilm.com/ivan-reitman-c … ll-murray/

PorridgeGun wrote:

It was a bit of a contrivance, albeit a typically awesome Breaking Bad Universe contrivance, just for Hank and Gomie to make it to the end of this episode without either of them being lit up by the Aryan brothers, who suddenly developed the shooting prowess of a bunch of Stormtroopers.

It would have been just as dramatic (if not more so) if the episode ended just before the first trigger was pulled. Then the audience would have been left wondering about more possibilities: Were the cops going to show their badge? Or were they going to put down their weapons? Was Walt going to intervene to get the Nazis to cease and desist? Was backup going to arrive before the shooting began? Then we would have been spared the ridiculous A-team shoot 'em up where no one gets hurt.

Todd's a cold sociopath. I want you to kill your mom. Okay, Mr White.

Hank's got frigg'n invincibility mode enabled. He's a big man with no cover. The goons had 1-2 minutes to line him up with their automatic weapons. And they all missed. And kept missing. And kept missing. And then Hanks pops up again to shoot some more, and then all miss him again. Useless hit-men!

619

(48 replies, posted in Episodes)

Fun fact: The German word for 'room' is zimmer. So you're looking at Zimmer's zimmer.

BBQ wrote:
avatar wrote:

I wish his character wasn't somewhat let down by the writers - becoming mostly directionless in the last season or two - no real motivation for anything, interspersed with random indignant rage.

If Jesse had a goal he was striving towards (e.g. starting a family, entering college, beginning a business, going legit) then it'd be easier to root for him, despite the bad things he's done.

As someone who's known and grew up with guys like Jesse, the idea that he would have a goal -- such as the examples presented -- would make zero sense.

Whether that makes a viewer more and less likely to "root" for him doesn't matter. That's not who Jesse Pinkman is as a person/character. So writing him that way, and sticking with who he is, is the ultimate service to a character. The real letdown would be if the writers shoehorned something contrary to what someone like Jesse would realistically want/do just to make the viewing experience more "standard" in terms of having less ambiguous good guys and bad guys.

Fair enough - doesn't have to be 'normal conventional society goals', but give him some direction. Anything. Just seeing him catatonic or talking bollocks with his deadshit friends (he's clearly brighter) or throwing his money away... I dunno... seems like a lost soul. Here's some more examples... the quest to become accepted by his parents (that subplot went nowhere), make enough dough to impress some chick (Great Gatsby plot), run his own competing meth lab that's even better than Walt's by first enrolling in a chemistry degree (Good Will Hunting plot), fresh start to get out of shitsville...

I'm not saying he has to succeed in any of these goals. There's more drama if he fails. But at least have some rudder. In any case, such a passive (& often idiotic) character would have become unsympathetic long ago in less capable hands, but Aaron Paul is knocking it out of the park.

Now that summer's over, how's the year shaping up so far?

http://hollywoodandswine.com/nations-yo … od-movies/

A budget of 1,000 clichés to produce this remake.

Saniss wrote:

I just want to say that Aaron Paul is an amazing actor (so are many actors in the show, granted). Jesse looks awfully empty in these last few episodes. Such dead eyes.

Agree. He's astonishingly good with what he's given. Deserves his Emmys. I wish his character wasn't somewhat let down by the writers - becoming mostly directionless in the last season or two - no real motivation for anything, interspersed with random indignant rage.

If Jesse had a goal he was striving towards (e.g. starting a family, entering college, beginning a business, going legit) then it'd be easier to root for him, despite the bad things he's done. It reminds me of a discussion we had here about Prometheus i.e. the Charlie Holloway character didn't care about anything and moped around, so the audience loses sympathy.

If DEA internal-affairs were investigating Walt's confessional video, they might have some circumstantial evidence to support it:
(1) Hank's recovery was paid for by Walt
(2) Hank's neglecting his DEA duties and has already been reprimanded for this
(3) Hank declined a promotion to remain in New Mexico
(4) Hank was targeted by a rival cartel
(5) Witnesses can testify that Walt was in Hank's office, and Hank closed the blinds twice
(6) Walt and Hank were driving around together to the Chicken Place while Hank was in the final stages of recovery

None of these are strong, but enough for the show's writers to make something of them if they chose to go down that route.

Trey wrote:

LOL

Just to be clear - I agree with the Doctor's review as far as content, just not as vehemently.   And even with all that, Elysium is still FAR better than ST:ID.

What he said. Oblivion, Stoker, Elysium - 2013 is the battle of the 6/10 movies. We'll settle for anything that keeps us amused for more than 10 minutes.