776

(5 replies, posted in Off Topic)

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120421064123/thecabininthewoods/images/4/43/Mordecai-the-cabin-in-the-woods.jpg

777

(84 replies, posted in Episodes)

They also gave her an hourglass figure and bedroom eyes - that was the sort of thing that was objected to, not her outfit.

778

(52 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Survival Odds Low for Paramount Execs After Collapse of Poorly-Constructed Tentpole

779

(359 replies, posted in Off Topic)

A lot of people guess that, but actually - Sulu's clearly holding daisies and it was established in The Corbomite Maneuver that's he's allergic.

780

(359 replies, posted in Off Topic)

http://www.pinkfive.com/images/i.chzbgr.jpg

781

(359 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Phil Plait says 'meh'.

782

(359 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Doctor Submarine wrote:

You guys have a very loose definition of what a "terrible movie" is.

Well, even without having seen the thing, I'm confident it's not "terrible" on the scale of Battleship or Transformers.   

I suspect the added outrage may be due to the first one being not-perfect, but at least fun, and a promising start for a new direction for the material.   Promptly followed by a face-plant.   

But it's early yet, too soon to know for sure if we've got another Matrix Reloaded or Iron Man 2 on our hands here.

783

(359 replies, posted in Off Topic)

FWIW, io9 - my go-to site for intelligent genre reviews - is also dispeased at being served reheated fan service instead of a story.

784

(359 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Haven't seen the movie, might see it eventually.  Not feeling much of a need yet.    So I've read all the spoilers because I don't care.   

Although the previous Trek wasn't perfect, what I liked most about it was the rather ingenious way it managed to free Trek from decades of continuity that had made it pretty much impossible to do anything interesting with the franchise.     And I'm still hopeful that JJ will do something similar with Star Wars, because it could use the same sort of canon-ectomy.

But yeah, based on the description of this new movie, it seems like that noble intent has been totally negated and replaced with simply dumping the Lego box of Fan Faves on the floor and reconnecting the pieces in random order.    It sounds like a fanfilm made by someone who's not actually a fan.    (See also Spaceballs, a comedic version of the same problem).

785

(19 replies, posted in Off Topic)

avatar wrote:

Question 3. You're ordering for you and your partner at a restaurant. You say to the waiter... "and [blank] will have the salad". How do you refer to your partner?

"Sweetpea"  is acceptable.  If it's 1912.

http://www.pinkfive.com/images/cal.jpg

786

(469 replies, posted in Episodes)

fireproof78 wrote:

The latter, definitely the latter one...
*doesn't really know*

'kay, fair enough.

787

(19 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I see the point, though.  The "horseless carriage" analogy is a good one, the idea that a new technology is first defined by the old technology it sorta resembles.  But cars don't actually have anything to do with horses, they're their own thing.   You could just as accurately call a car a "wombatless carriage" nowadays.  And "internet" has a better ring to it than "high-speed automatic telegraph", too.

To those of use who lived through the transition, we think of these devices as "phones that got smart". But the "phone" aspect is a minor function of what "smartphones" do now.  How often do they get used for actual voice communication, vs everything else you can do with one?     Even if "smartphone" remains the common name, the "phone" part is gonna need to be defined for younger folk pretty soon.   

You see, son - "phone" meant a device that ONLY let you talk to other people, and you could only use it when both you and the other person were holding interfaces that were hardwired into the wall of your house.   

Geez, Dad, that sounds awful, but I guess you needed some way to pass the time while you were lighting your woodstove, huh?

788

(16 replies, posted in Episodes)

I'd say it was robbed, yeah.   But Phantom Menace and Matrix were locks for nominations, so Mummy and Stuart were basically in a race for third place.   I'd bet they were pretty close in votes.

789

(52 replies, posted in Off Topic)

They HAD a third act, shot it, then decided it didn't work and shot a different one.

790

(52 replies, posted in Off Topic)

3D, not VFX.   It's the 3D conversion company they're talking about.

And it does say GROSS thresholds - doing it for NET is a fool's game, but I might take a chance on gross points if the threshold was low enough.  As in, "okay, if you make less than 100 mil global, you owe me nothing".  But it's a pretty safe bet this movie will do better than that.

791

(52 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Interesting Deadline article by a reviewer who's actually seen the flick and thought it was quite good... but speculates whether the bad buzz will take its toll...

http://www.deadline.com/2013/05/after-f … ng-corpse/

792

(25 replies, posted in Off Topic)

http://www.gruffrhys.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/dark_star-213x300.jpg

John Carpenter and Dan O'Bannon did it first.

793

(359 replies, posted in Off Topic)

SPOILER Show
http://www.pinkfive.com/images/steeeve.jpg

794

(45 replies, posted in Episodes)

Well, I like Hellboy 2 a lot.  But even I will admit it suffers from Too Much Of Everything Syndrome.

And judging from the Pacific Rim trailers, del Toro's condition has worsened into All of Everything Syndrome (aka Bay's Palsy).

But - his forays into sensory overload aside - I think del Toro does balance the eye candy with good character work and story structure.   So I am looking forward to Pacific Rim even though I know I'll need to go spend some time in a quiet room with my eyes closed afterward.

795

(36 replies, posted in Off Topic)

On the other hand, when a bouncy lady who's also an Oscar winner does an ad for beer shampoo, that's a slam-dunk.

Anyway.  Orson Scott Card hates gay people.

796

(36 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Next thing ya know, they'll be using bikini chicks to sell beer.

797

(36 replies, posted in Off Topic)

But that's exactly the idea - to give adults a reason to get interested in seeing the movie.  Take away the Oscar name-checking and you just have a trailer for a 'splode movie about kids in space.   (What was the last one of those -  Thunderbirds, maybe?   Tanked. )

798

(36 replies, posted in Off Topic)

fcw wrote:

Are these post-Fordian times?

Yes.   Other than Indy 4, Ford hasn't "opened" a movie since What Lies Beneath in 2000.     *ahem* Cowboys and Aliens *ahem*

And when your lead is (essentially) an unknown, it's not a bad policy to promote whatever names you can.   The fact that there ARE so many high-pedigree actors on board is rather intriguing to me, actually. 

Yes, the Ben Kingsley brand is a bit diminished these days, but Viola Davis is quite a "get" - even though she looks like she came straight from the set of Solaris without even changing her costume.

799

(17 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Well, if nothing else it serves as the counter-argument for "why don't they just do a Firefly kickstarter?"   

I'm not seeing a lot of promotion of this thing - which is critical to a successful KS - and their pitch doesn't  sell the idea the way it needs to be sold.  And sadly, even the guy who wrote The Trouble With Tribbles doesn't have the star power to pull in the kind of numbers they need by himself.   They should have gotten Takei, then they might have had a chance.

Yes, a Firefly KS would get more love than Star Wolf is getting, and would probably get to 650K (and more) without too much trouble.    Except 650K isn't enough to make an episode of Firefly - it'd have to be several million at least.  And even if they made that much (and probably could) that's still just ONE episode. 

TV shows work as a pipeline, one team is writing, another is shooting, another is doing the post in an assembly-line process, until they've ground out the 10 or 13 or 22 episodes in the season.  Funding one episode at a time, then starting all over again from scratch to make a second "episode" just isn't a viable process.   At the very least, you're looking at re-staffing every phase of the production with every episode, since there'll be months of downtime between each.

So even IF everybody wanted to come back and do Firefly and even IF Fox would let them try crowdfunding it, they'd need to pull together maybe 50 million or more to fund a 13-episode production run.  And I don't think even the mighty Firefly could pull in that much via Kickstarter.

At least Star Wolf didn't go for too low a number - 650K is a workable price to make an hour of something, if you're very careful and cut every corner you can find. It doesn't seem likely to happen, they're already pretty much dead in the water.   But that's probably better than asking for too small a number, hitting it, and then having to deliver on it.

800

(133 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I've been trying to get this crowd to do Predator and/or Lethal Weapon since the day we started this monkeyfarm.

Along with Die Hard, that's the damn Holy Trinity of '80's action and still - no luck.  Kids today.  Meh.