101

(15 replies, posted in Off Topic)

So, in the last I think three weeks, Star Wars Rebels had an amazing episode (mileage will vary) where Ezra ends up on everyone's favorite dust bowl-Tatooine.

Now, spoilers for those of you who watch either Star Wars Rebels or Star Wars Clone Wars. So, fair warning.


Spoilers away smile

  Show
Darth Maul survived the Clone Wars, and ends up in Rebels attempting to bring about his revenge upon, well, pretty much everyone. He's been trying to make Ezra his new apprentice, and Ezra ends up thinking he needs to find Obi-Wan. Well, Maul follows Ezra to Obi-Wan, resulting in a battle.

For those of you who are fans of bladed combat, this fight is very much Seven Samurai, both in its speed as well as its execution. It also gives great insight in to how Maul and Obi-Wan has changed as characters.

102

(9 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Here's more to add to the fun:
Star Trek (2009) recut to Firefly intro

103

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Writhyn wrote:

Chirrut believes in the Force. Baze doesn't. Chirrut's example brought Baze around. It's a small arc but it's there, and it's not shabby in the emotional payoff when it happens.

Chirrut was my favorite character, definitely a ray of optimism in the more depressing story.

It's a simple story, but one I very much enjoyed.

104

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I agree with Boter and BDA. Rogue One wasn't ground backing in the story sense, but I at least had a sense of each character, their motivations, and the like. I didn't like most of them, and some were thinner than most, but I at least had a sense of what they wanted.

I think where RO really fails as a film is the introduction of a larger Rebel strike force. The idea that you have multiple characters already, and then add in Cassian's crew to increase the body count felt like it took time away from actually developing the central cast.

Of all the character stories present, I think that Galen Erso's and Chirrut Imwe (somehow I spelled that on the first go) have the more interesting ones.

105

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Writhyn wrote:

I couldn't disagree more on the characters. I thought each one had a good motivation and a good arc. But that's me.

I couldn't disagree more with either of you. Sorry, I thought that was just saying wink

I didn't like Saw at all, and felt he was a wasted character, especially for just being in Act 1, especially for how disjointed Act 1 was in editing. The rest of the characters were mixed, and while I didn't "like" most of them, I could at least appreciate their arcs and wanted to see the Rebels succeed-which is more than I could say for the Jedi in the PT.

That said, I do agree with Writhyn that the characters were at least interesting enough to keep me engaged in the film.

106

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Writhyn wrote:

As much fun as the two guys were having, I thought Danielle Nicolet (Hart's character's wife) was great in it. She played a great character, especially during the couple therapy session.
I think the only thing that kept it from being a solid fun movie for me was Johnson's dumb act. It was fine until his full intentions were revealed, but then it played completely wrong. If his character had been just acting the ditz, fine, but afterward we should've seen him sober up a bit. Funny as it is to say, I think johnson is too smart to play dumb very well. Maybe it just didn't work for this movie, though.

You're right. Danielle Nicolet was fantastic and the therapy scene was hands down one of my favorites.

I agree that Dwayne Johnson's ditz bit was hard to swallow, but I also think he was trying to be insecure, which also does not fit him. But, I loved the ending.

Again, not a perfect film, but enjoyable enough for what it is.

107

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

What's the usual pallet cleanse between films?

"Central Intelligence"

If you saw the trailer at all, then you have a pretty good idea of what the film will be about. However, what saves this film from being a paint by numbers buddy-cop comedy is the chemistry between Johnson and Hart. The two play very well off of each other and have a lot of fun with a pretty typical flick.

I had a lot of fun with it, with several laugh out loud moments. If you don't watch it, at least search for the blooper reel. That was a lot of fun too.

108

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Teague wrote:

I felt the same way, Fire.

Mmm. Weird nickname.

Proof?

Mmm. Not better.

78.

Proof 78.

Ha-ha, I'm on fire...

I'll show myself out.

109

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

"The Jungle Book"
The more recent live action adaptation of a beloved Disney classic based upon a book, this film is quite well done. More so than just being a substitution of live action instead of animation, the film has its own narrative, that builds upon Mowgli's developing in to a greater awareness of the world. All the characters have their own unique feel, and even minor, bit parts, provide a great atmosphere of a lived in world.

While I enjoyed all of the casting, Idris Elba stood out as Shere Khan, and Christopher Walker as King Louie. It's also worth it to watch the credits as Walker delivers his rendition of "Want to be like You."

The film also does not dip in to musical territory. Instead, any songs that are sung come from the narrative, rather than being forced in over the story.

Finally, I really did not expect it to end the way it did, and it is certainly was a well done film. It's on Netflix in the US, so hopefully y'all get a chance to enjoy, if you haven't already and I'm just behind.

A

110

(19 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Boter wrote:

The Oscars are kind of a joke. It's an elite class of people that have specific tastes in movies and I don't buy into the fiction that the general public should give a shit what they think. A lot of you guys like the kinds of movies that the Academy does, and that's fine, but I and many others do not.

Am I glad that Jungle Book got VFX? Quite. But it's still a party that Hollywood throws for itself that it tells everybody else they should care about.

That's my feeling as well. Being on the outside of that world makes it difficult to really appreciate all the goings on that make it all happen.

So, it's hard for me to feel that these awards are important because they rarely line up with the films I enjoy. I mean, I understand recognition and the hard work that goes in to the films, but it's still not for me.

However, congratulations to all the winners.

111

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Trey wrote:
fireproof78 wrote:

The film is a lot of fun, has a tone of inside jokes, and allusions to other movies, as well as some touching themes. It's on Netflix right now, so go watch it.

Ditto.  I think Zootopia is my fave film of 2016.   As for inside jokes - as a former longtime resident of Tujunga, CA, I loved the completely random reference to how nobody outside Tujunga seems to know how to pronounce Tujunga.

That was a fun pit. I also love that Alan Tudyk played a weasel, selling bootlegged  films, and on and on.

112

(85 replies, posted in Off Topic)

They have a new FX studio now, too, from what I've gathered-Pixomondo, of GoT fame.

113

(649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Time to download

114

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Good grief, ya'll need to lighten up.
Though, Squiggly, sorry about your car. Deer suck. Did you at least get some meat?
Zootopia
Late to the party, and I don't care. This movie trades in Disney tropes, mocks them and fulfills them as well.

The protagonist is the likable Judy Hops, determined to be the first rabbit police officer. She meets resistance from pretty much everyone, and is desperate to prove herself. Along the way, she meets Nick, a fox who is the sarcastic cynic to Judy's optimism.

The film is a lot of fun, has a tone of inside jokes, and allusions to other movies, as well as some touching themes. It's on Netflix right now, so go watch it.

115

(54 replies, posted in Episodes)

El Nameaux-Standardon wrote:

Thought I'd say two things here:

Point 1

Trey wrote:

Which was the set up for the best scene in the original movie: when Neo and co. are in the Matrix and Cypher is on the ship with the power to kill them all with the flick of a switch - and Neo is utterly powerless to stop him.

Yes, but that scene ended with Cypher tempting "fate" to intervene - and then Tank turned out to have survived and fried him to death.


And then during the "heist" in Reloaded, a bridge screw gets loose, Final Destination style, which causes the Saw guy to fall to his death, and cause said bridge to impale the Vigilant's operator shortly before that ship gets blown up.

This seems to imply that had the two survived until the explosion, they might've alarmed the Neb crew in time for them to abort the operation - instead, Link and Trinity are too late to warn them, which causes Trinity to go into the Matrix and thus fulfill Neo's dream sequence.

Even if it doesn't imply that (which would be a flaw in the scriptwriting, I suppose), the way it's shot and presented still conveys rather strongly that the "loose screw" isn't just a random accident and there's a significance to everything that's happening.



So these 2 moments in M1 and Reloaded already set up the possibility of "magic in real world" - Neo's superpowers don't entirely come out of nowhere.

On the other hand of course, this set-up is one of the several things that get dropped by Revolutions - so it's not resolved at any point.





Point 2
So has anyone else noticed the close similarity between the last 2/3rds of Revolutions (i.e. minus the Jabba part), and Return of the King?


If you want to get the most out of this movie, here's a recommendation: start watching it somewhere into the 2nd act (Neo in the subway station right before he gets freed; the Oracle scene; or maybe after Smith takes over the Oracle and it cuts to Bane, just somewhere in that general area), and pretend like you haven't seen anything that's come before:
you just turned on the TV, and are naturally led to assume that the "Matrix trilogy" is some kind of LOTR rip-off redressed in a cyberpunk setting and you're watching the climactic 3rd chapter of it.


It... holds up surprisingly well. In fact, when you consider how LOTR tends to be universally praised in the same breath as M3 is "panned", it's baffling how small the difference in quality is: some small pacing/plotting issues, the Kid opens the gate pretentiously etc., but other than that it's almost as good.

Context can make all the difference in the world, though. Because, as noted on the FIYH commentary, LOTR wasn't supposed to work. No one had done anything like it. The Matrix, on the other hand, was its own success, a self-contained story that didn't require Reloaded or Revolutions.

That being said, I am curious to try your suggestion.

116

(50 replies, posted in Episodes)

Sounds like the opening to a two man show.

117

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Teague wrote:

The whole Riddick thing continues to be this fucking mystery to me. What a bizarre series of rungs to try to build a single ladder out of.

I personally still like Chronicles of Riddick more than any of the other films, but yeah, it is weird. I really wish Chronicles had been the start and laid the foundation a little bit differently, going full space opera from the beginning, while than having the sci-fi horror of "Pitch Black" and then space opera and then survival, with tie in properties. Well, the video game was fun.

Also, Teague, people like Prometheus and think it works perfectly as a prequel. Please figure that one out.

BigDamnArtist wrote:
fireproof78 wrote:

I'm not sure I agree about the Star Wars not being special anymore. I think it will hit that point, but right now, having these little (I know I say little) side stories about things that we don't "need" but are still interesting additions to the world.

I have a pet theory that as these sorts of mainstream franchises become more and more popular (Marvel/DC/Star Wars) we'll start seeing a cultural shift away from isolated self contained stories and towards expansive universes where various stories can occur. Basically what happened with the EU but through film. And obviously that's what Disney is pushing for with Star Wars, fleshing out the universe and building themselves a sandbox to play in.

My hope is that as they work through the sort of "cultural main-stay concepts", (young Han Solo, Rogue One, Boba Fett, etc) they'll start getting the ability to branch out and experiment with the universe more, without the audience raging because "THIS ISN'T THE STAR WARS WE KNOW WTF BOYCOTT"; and dipping into and playing with some of the more random bits of the universe that have nothing to do with the Skywalker storyline.

Given the different routes that Clone Wars and Rebels has gone, there is certainly examples of them willing to try some different types of stories. I think, with the success of RO, and it's darker tone, there might be a genuine way to get those different stories.

MartyJ wrote:

I went to see again.

The first half felt a little flawed (sort of disjointed) - it could use a rewrite. I was worried that R1 is gonna turn out to be another Godzilla 2014 (a totally dry, humorless movie with uninteresting characters that didn't work for me at all), but Krennic, K-2SO and the final battle redeemed it for me.

Star Wars isn't special anymore; it's become just another franchise owned by a big corporation and we have to live with that. Just like the MCU, the SW movies are gonna be a mixed bag; it would be extremely hard to avoid it. The spin-off movie series was created to try different tones and sensibilities and that's what we've got with R1. I'm moderately satisfied with the movie, though it's definitely not flawless. Anyone who hates it can wait a year for the next one - there's always gonna be a next one wink

A final note: The most ridiculous piece of criticism I've heard somewhere is "R1 sucks because it canonizes the prequels by using Jimmy Smits". Dude, the prequels were always canon. I agree that they're awful, but they're canon and there's nothing we can do about it tongue

Sure there is-don't watch them wink

I'm not sure I agree about the Star Wars not being special anymore. I think it will hit that point, but right now, having these little (I know I say little) side stories about things that we don't "need" but are still interesting additions to the world.

120

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

avatar wrote:
Boter wrote:

I agree that there was a lot of "they fight, because it's in the title". I enjoyed the fighting but as MCU grows it's one I may skip in marathons. Depends on how its own actions are paid off later down the line.

OMG, imagine a MCU marathon. Hours (eventually days!) of PG13 WWE-esque consequence-less punching. Go to the can, to the fridge, have a nap, check social media, run some errands, return to the couch, and they're still punching (in between quips and sky lasers)

This is probably one of the first Marvel films that left me with more questions than anything else. Yes, I'm sure that sounds odd, given this community. But, with  most Marvel films I'm either annoyed by the end or thoroughly entertained. Even with the ones that are "meh" I can at least have some fun at the film's expense.

But, with Civil War, it had some great moments and then a really fun scene and then spiraled downward until it became a spectacular wreck. Seriously, what are you doing, movie?

I honestly had thought that they had just used reference film and inserted him in digitally, as in no new footage. I couldn't believe the work they did. I know this forum is not usually in to the FX for the sake of FX but I loved every moment between Tarkin and Krennic.

Also, some follow up thoughts after a week of thinking on this film, as well as reviewing some other reviews. First of all, I read that Edwards shot a lot of additional footage for the trailers and that the battle at the end use to be longer. Instead, they cut down the battle an added in Cassian's intro scene, and Jyn's jail break. In my opinion, some of those scenes were not necessary. When I read that, I recalled Trey's statement from Episode 1 (of all episodes) to "Cut Act 1."

Now, I don't think it needed a full cut, but I think the first act was too jumpy, too sporadic, and too many locations to keep up on. I think they needed to reduce it by a couple of locations, and possibly cut Jyn's breakout, or at least put it on another planet already introduced. Which, I honestly was expecting with were Cassian started out, but then we're at another location. Quite jarring actually.

Writhyn wrote:
Trey wrote:

the whole movie should have been the third act.  Start the movie with the Rebels deciding all is lost, and then one ship of wacky misfits says fuck it, there's one thing that might work and we're gonna try for it.  What little back story we needed could have been covered on the flight over - guess what, my dad designed the death star and it's got a weakness, if we can just get hold of the plans.  And off we go.   

...Because once they set out on the REAL mission, Rogue One is actually pretty darn good, and of course I LOVE that every blessed one of 'em died.  That was awesome.   But that first hour... yeeesh.

This isn't the first time I've heard this, but I disagree. I thought the first "hour" was great for developing the characters and establishing motivations. And sure WE know what the Death Star can do, but it was really cool to see the characters reacting to even its low-power operation. For me, it made the Death Star (after 3 movies with a variant) more imposing and "real" than ever before.

But that's me. I'm more interested in hearing from Trey or anyone who agrees with him (because I'm genuinely curious): what makes the first "hour" of this movie different from the character setup from, say Star Wars '77? Couldn't that movie have started with the Alliance looking up and there's the Death Star over their secret base? Or maybe with a ship of misfits showing up at the Death Star to rescue the princess after the Tantive IV opening? Do we really need to know why a Jedi hermit, a farmboy, a scruffy smuggler, and his pet human show up to help?
I liked the setup of Rogue One, and it's fine if we disagree, but what makes it less important than the setup of Star Wars or any other movie? (since we're probably not getting a DiF discussion anytime soon)

Same here. I just got back and found it highly enjoyable and engaging story. Not on that had to b told, sure but engaging just the same.

The first hour I liked because I got to know Jyn and her family. I think I identified with Galen the most, as a character, so it was nice to see him and his motivation. Star Wars continues the let's traumatize young kids with death motif, but Jyn at least didn't have to wait forever for some sort of parent figure.

I hope that the we can get more insight in to people's likes and dislikes. smile

For me:

The good:
-Characters are interesting, sarcastic, and have a history that is alluded at, with only Jyn's really being explored. Some exposition to make them interesting but not so much that it boggd down the story.

-Set pieces. Boy there a lot of them, and that probably could have been reduced. But, the thing I did like was that several felt distinct, and few felt like repeats over previous locations.

-Humor-which mostly came from KC, was written well. It was nice to have those moments of laughter before the darker tone really dominated.

-Huge space battle. Much bigger than I was expecting. Great use of footage of Gold Leader, Red Leader and other pilots.

The bad:
-Was Jedha such a problem for the Empire that they would test the Death Star? Felt like that destruction was a bit unnecessary.

-The Imperial archive felt needlessly complex.

-Lie detector alien? Um, a little unnecessary and stretched out that first scene with Saw on Jedha uncomfortably long.

-Did not care for Vader's attack at the end.

There's more but that's a bit off the cuff.

123

(9 replies, posted in Creations)

Works for me now smile

124

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Finally saw Captain America Civil War and got a chance to write my thoughts done about it.

First of all, the opening is well done an interesting, showcasing the Avengers as a team, working to prevent (insert action set piece here). And I like it because it makes nods to "Age of Ultron" and consequences for a lot of different characters from across the films. Which, ok, if you're going to have a "cinematic universe" that's a good way to pay that off. It also introduced Black Panther which I thought was the most enjoyable of characters. He actually had an arc too, even. Also, Spider-Man was in it and he was fun.

But, the way the consequences play out actually start out very big and world impacting and go to incredibly small, for some weird reason.

  Show
The Avengers are being manipulated by someone who has a grudge in to destroying each other. When Iron Man and Captain America get the "villain's monologue" (trademark pending) and realize they are being manipulated still end up fighting. Um, why? You're being manipulated by the bad guy and you let him continue. If Black Panther hadn't been there, the bad guy would be dead, leaving the Avengers to tear themselves apart.

So, starts out strong but the ending feels so poorly done that I'm left more confused by the result. Sorry if this has been talked about before, but this is one film that I not only left feeling extraordinarily confused but felt didn't even work as a film by the end.

125

(248 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Sam wrote:

Ah Mike! I'm so glad to hear from you!

This has genuinely made my week.

(Also, there must be some way of convincing Teague to do a couple podcasts...I won't let go just yet)

http://wmbriggs.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/never.jpg