Miss having friends in your forum? We've migrated over to discord! Many of the threads that started here years ago continue on in a new setting. Come join us!
You guys should stop watching these shitty movies.
Or at least stop taking them seriously. I mean... Robocop is a fucking stupid idea for a movie. It was amazing that the first one was as watchable as it was, but it was because the people making it knew it was a fucking stupid idea for a movie. It's an action/comedy. It's schlock. I knew the remake was going to be complete shit from the instant the trailer came out, because it was taking itself too fucking seriously. Why the fuck are we trying to take Robocop seriously?
Why the fuck do we want to take Robocop seriously? No one expected Robocop to be a 'good' movie back when it came out. It's a movie called "Robocop".
How do you make a modern Robocop movie, seriously, and make it work? Step one is to change the name to something that isn't retarded. Next, you'd have to do an entirely different take on it, ground it hard, make it a dramatic thriller with a couple of really quick and brutal action beats... Now you have a movie that only resembles the original in passing because there's a guy who's mostly a robot and also a cop.
Genuinely, tho, why the fuck do we keep taking this fucking schlock and trying to make real movies out of it? I don't want to watch Robocop: The thematically relevant dramatic eye-opener that happens to have a couple of shitty CGI action scenes and bad jokes. I wanna watch Robocop: the robot cop who has a gun that can take your leg off and throws people through walls but also occasionally has a moment of reflection and lots of dark humor.
Kinda ranty, but I'm so over these fucking movies. New Robocop movie is fucking awful. Who the fuck didn't see that one coming? Fuck fuckitty fuck fuck.
Deus Ex is already being adapted into a movie as we speak, and the writer has talked openly about the similarities to Robocop, and how Deus Ex deals with a very different set off themes. I do think that adaptation has the chance to be very successful in movie form.
I am very excited to hear that. I have been hoping for one since I played that game (multiple times I might add).
It does have the dystopian world but is less about that and more about the conspiracies that drive the collapse. The theme of conspiracy and distrust would be one place that could set it apart.
Honestly, if that can work than doing the robotic cop, almost like I, Robot, there would be comparisons to RoboCop but it should be able to stand on its own with theme, story and characters.
Deus Ex could do that. A reboot RoboCop doesn't seem able to.
The themes in the new Robocop could honestly have been done without the Robocop name. Then it doesn't come with the automatic burden of being compared to the original. They may be wanting to explore new themes, but those themes could be overshadowed by it being a remake.
The trouble with that theory is if you still want to do the story about a robot cop, the comparisons are inevitable anyway. People have compared the new Deus Ex to RoboCop and they couldn't be more stylistically different. Though, in this chicken/egg story, I would imagine they said "Let's remake RoboCop" before they decided what it was going to be about.
I think that is more to my point, that they came up with a RoboCop reboot then wanted new themes. Deus Ex can be compared all they want, but that was a story (and world) built around a different theme. Also, could be an amazing movie, but I digress
Personally, I think it can be done if you start with the theme and not the iconic nature of Robocop and create your own thing.
I think I would be more on board with this film and exploring the themes it does if it wasn't a remake of Robocop. Like I said, I have no love for the original Robocop, but I get what they did there and why they did it.
The themes in the new Robocop could honestly have been done without the Robocop name. Then it doesn't come with the automatic burden of being compared to the original. They may be wanting to explore new themes, but those themes could be overshadowed by it being a remake.
I don't know who is brave enough to go see it (I certainly am not feeling up to it) but apparently "awesome" because it takes the concept and makes it more "modern."
I'm sorry, was there no way to make this modern half robot/half human story you want to tell without rebooting an iconic franchise? I mean, I am no fan of the original but I can certainly respect the work that was done there. Not sure this reboot can say the same thing...
Depends on how you play it. If you play as survival horror, survive the nightly zombies and skeletons and work your way through to defeating an ender dragon, then it's more of a game. If you play just to create stuff, as I do, it's more of a toy - the sort of thing that deserves the label "sandbox" more than most. I don't believe that there's a specific term for such things, so toys in the trappings of a video game are something that I would still refer to as games, just a new genre of them.
Exactly.
It's new, and needs a new genre term. That's all there is to it.
But, any time there is something new, it leads to asking the basic question of "what is a game?" Your answer may be different from mine, but that doesn't mean it is a futile exercise. I have been playing video games for as long as I can remember, Atari and the like. Some work better than others and some don't interest me. But, if you were to sit down and explain what Minecraft is to me, I would listen and try to give it a shot. I would also compare it to very game I have ever played. Reference points is part of the reason I define things. It helps me understand.
Boter's example explains to me more about Minecraft than anything else I have ever read on the game.
It is human nature (at least in my experience) to try to classify something in existing categories and when it doesn't fit we question its nature. Minecraft is one of those games that doesn't really fit the mold in the traditional gaming sense and has an interesting learning curve.
So it becomes an argument of pedantic semantics attempting to arbitrarily define some boundaries into which a broad and varied medium can be shoved, and then leave content in the knowledge that anything outside of those boundaries can be easily dismissed?
Or ends with the only definition possible so as to satisfy everyone, that winds up being so broad you may as well just say anything that moves and flashes is inside the box.
Yeah, thanks, but I've got better things to do.
I suppose you can call it that but I simply point out that Minecraft does not fit a current gaming definition so a new term has to be created.
If defining terms is pedantic then I must have a degree in it
Seriously though, what will you discuss if not the questions minecraft raises?
Well that's up to Tom, but I don't think Minecraft inherently raises the question of "What is a game." any more than any other game on the planet.
At the risk of sounding argumentative, any game that breaks the usual categories of first person shooter, role play, real time strategy or simulation automatically brings up the question. It happens by virtue that this game is different.
It is human nature (at least in my experience) to try to classify something in existing categories and when it doesn't fit we question its nature. Minecraft is one of those games that doesn't really fit the mold in the traditional gaming sense and has an interesting learning curve.
Ok, rant done. Sorry, that was longer than I meant it to be
Web Harping About Theater Art, Rarely Expected Years Of Unending Discussion On Insane Nitpicking Gathering Massive Observations Various Intense Explanations
Yeah, I probably bring a lot of my own concrete to that, but I do that with every film, so it it isn't new for me.
ST 09 and ID build off of potential I see in TOS but are unexplored. For me, there is not an expectation that Kirk behave like Kirk in the sense that he is controlled or disciplined or experienced the way that Shatner Kirk is. To me, that is unreasonable because they are not exactly a one to one correlation. The personality is similar, as noted in I think the Wrath of Khan Commentary, where Kirk can take a punch and keep grinning. Spock can take in a situation without the emotional involvement, unless it gets more personal. There are several instances in TOS and the movies that revolve around that.
It might be unearned but the characters speak to me in a way that is more realistic than many of the other Star Trek series have. It is strictly personal but it is a reason I am some supportive of the movie is that there is a message that carries further than the action set pieces.
