You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Friends In Your Head | Forums → Posts by fireproof78
My dad really enjoyed the Goonies, so I grew up with it too. It scared me, made me laugh and had pirates in it. I was too young to get all the adult humor, and I still remember the whole training wheels blowing off the bike and the pirate ship sailing out of the bay.
Since I always loved ships and treasure, it too hit me at the right time. For me, it is just that wonderful sense of adventure, set in the real world. It also has some incredible tense scenes, that still work very well.
Zarban wrote:And as social commentary, it kind of says "Look, these are irredeemable people, most of them. They really just need somewhere positive to channel their energy."
If all they need is a positive place to channel their energy, doesn't that mean they are basically redeemable?
Yeah, that's my question...
avatar wrote: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.
Will we though? None of those movies did well at the box office.
Well, with the industry the way that it is, I think that it will take more than a meager summer at the box office to change the trend.
Those contemporaneous Internet reactions to the casting of Ledger are great. Who wouldn't bet money that every one of those commenters changed his mind after seeing the movie? Check out the guy who said Heath was the "worst casting of all time," or the one who says he "couldn't act his way out of a paper bag." Now people are saying the same things about Affleck.
Raising a skeptical eyebrow about the casting is justified here, no doubt. This is a guy who has already botched a superhero flick and has starred in a whole heap of trite, forgettable movies. Now, if you're an actor, this is also known as "working," which can be hard to hold against someone, blah blah blah Michael Caine's argument. So, sure, I get why fans would take a "past performance is the best indicator of future outcomes" attitude. But it is not an absolute given that he will suck.
I can totally see why Affleck would jump at the chance to play Batman. Even if I'm already a millionaire, if Warners wanted to make me an even bigger millionaire for playing Batman, I'm doing it. But also, with Argo winning the Oscar, he's something of a power player—or at the very least, he's got better options now than after Gigli. Playing Batman in what could be one of the biggest grossing movies ever gives him even more clout. And what are the downsides? People saying that he sucks? That he ruined a comic book film? Been there, done that. For him, there's minimal risk, and nothing but rewards.
Kevin Smith apparently likes the casting. I'm not sure he'd feel that way if they weren't buddies and if Ben hadn't always agreed to be in Kevin's movies, but there you go.
Yep, this. Not sure how much weight Kevin Smith carries but cool tool.
My grandfather had a saying. "Do what you love. If you can't do what you love, then work so you can do what you love."
Affleck has an opportunity here, like you said, that involves little risk and probably a lot of fun for him.
Besides, I do believe that both Ledger and Michael Keaton received the frowny face of despair from fans...until the film came out.
I'm rooting for.... Universal Healthcare
/Z
So, they just move to Massachusetts...or Europe?
Problem solved and happy ending. Roll credits 
*loves simplified endings* 
Oops. Sorry, Zap. I must have been thinking of Switzerland.
C'mon guys, Moose aren't THAT scary. I had some in my backyard the other night... but unless you hit them with your car, and unless you walked in on their kids... they run from you. Very shy.
Well.
Generally.
/Z
Um, methinks you need to meet a North Idaho moose then, since a friend of mine was chased down by one on his snowmobile and kept in a creek bed for over an hour by another one.
Here is a bit of a almost bizarre article regarding Affleck as Batma: http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-b … at-batman/
I call it bizarre because really the only main argument in there is that it won't be as bad as the fans are imagining...but that is supposed to be a bright side. I mean, am I only the only one who thinks that Affleck could bring more to the role than just good looks?
MasterZap wrote:"Breaking Bad" is what happens when you don't have Universal Health Care.
In Sweden, Walt AND Hank's total medical bill would probably not go above $1000 ... combined.
/Z
If only Americans knew more of what universal health care (not just Sweden, but most of NW Europe, Australia, NZ, Canada, Britain) was like, they wouldn't be protesting in the streets NOT to have government health care (getcha gomamen hands off ma cancer-ridden body). They've not been well served by the media or politicians in informing them of the alternatives.
You'd think that the one redeeming feature of US health care is that it'd cost less than 'socialized' health care, but actually Americans spend more per capita. Their privatised system is extremely inefficient.
Hey look, Breaking Bad gifs 
Saw it last night. Thought it was absolutely pants.
I was pretty excited for Elysium as the trailers made it look pretty decent, but they really dropped the ball here. The concept was great on paper, but no one did anything that made sense. You've guys pretty much have covered why it was awful, but I got to thinking what could've made this a great movie:
First of all, why do most movies nowadays tend to build up this interesting world and then try and tear it down in 90 minutes? This is why Dredd was such a success, it was just him trying to get on with his day. You don't need to do it about the rebooting of Elysium.
They could've had Matt Damon find out his kid is sick or something and then show him deal with that by way of getting to Elysium. Maybe have him get a hold of those shuttle launch codes that the poor people just happen to have in the beginning of the movie with not much explanation. You have Max trying to get his kid to a medi bay. That's all the premise of the movie should be. Along the lines of that Firefly episode perhaps (Ariel I think it was called?)
That would be a much tenser and exciting sequence of events to watch, in my opinion.
That was my initial impression of it was that Damon's motivation was more personal than really just a tool to achieve a specific end.
Would making it more personal have worked better?
Alright, time to play and I will try to follow the rules.
1. Star Wars: If one film defines me, it's this film. From the time I can remember, I have drawn (poorly, I might add) scenes or ships from this movie. To this day, my favorite fighter is the Y-wing and, if my mother would have let me, it would play constantly in my house. While I saw Return of the Jedi first (some confusion for a while about the story) Star Wars became both the defining one as well as a huge impact upon my development.
2. Beauty and the Beast: somewhere, there is a newspaper clipping of my stating my favorite things in 3rd grade. Favorite movie: Beauty and the Beast. The story is great, the songs are memorable and there is some genuine humor that as a kid I got. To top it off, one of the lead animators, Glen Keene, came to my school and showed us preliminary sculpts of the Beast. It got me wondering how movies were made, as well as the fact that it served as a distraction from my biggest fear (thunderstorms).
3. Aladdin: My sister and I memorized this movie after only one or two viewings. While it annoyed my mom, there was a time where it served her well, as my sister and I recited the whole film while on a road trip. It provided some much needed relief while my folks got us un-lost. We still recite the film to this day
Good times.
Just watched Sahara on Netflix after remembering Trey referencing it, and I loved it. Stupid, ludicrous fun. Maybe you guys could take a whack at it?
Fun film, and never understood the ill will towards it. Not a perfect movie, but a perfectly fun adventurous romp.
I'd be curious to here more in depth views on it.
Well, to each their own.
I think, as far as theme and storyline, Into Darkness resonates with me a little bit more than Elysium.
Reading this review makes me glad I took the time and saw Star Trek Into Darkness rather than this one.
I loved the recording of this episode and certainly understand where everyone is coming from, both Teague and Trey and Brian.
Personally, I of two minds on this movie. I love realistic portrayals, to a certain degree, and things like the real world stakes that this plague will decimate a huge amount of the world's population. That's worrying to me in a cerebral level and creates stakes, real stakes in terms of the real world. This isn't a threat to one town but the whole world and the movie treats with with a particular gravitas.
But, that isn't always a good story. I liken Teague's reaction to the government dude from Sahara when William H Macy presents how quickly the toxins will spread from Africa to the rest of the world's oceans. In movies like that, we tend to chuckle and go, "This is serious, right? I should be worried?" but it doesn't quite viscerally shake us. It doesn't grab us like the threat of the little girl eating the disease ridden cookie in "Outbreak" or sick to the stomach of a feeling that can come watching people freak out over loved ones dying. So, I don't like "Contagion" because it is a little too "realistic" in that sense. I don't always watch films for realism.
At the same time, the fact that it is realistic is an amazing feat, especially with an A level cast. I was talking with a friend of mine who recently watched "Olympus Has Fallen" and she could barely make it through.
Why?
Because the President of the United States tells a Cabinet member to give up the secret code to the bad guys because he can't stand to see her tortured, even though she held up better than a two star general. Both of those points made my friend yell at the screen because the people were so stupid! So, if realism means that I see TV doctors make medical decisions that MAKE SENSE, I'll take Contagion. I'll take the fact that there isn't always people I connect with because people sometimes make me cringe a little-sometimes I don't understand people. I'm ok with medical speak because I grew up with it and understand it, but I get that people don't.
Perhaps the final note to make is the simple fact that there is no happy ending, and that can really unnerve people. I know it unnerves me, and I usually don't watch films if they don't have a happy ending. Yes, I like realism, to a degree, but happy endings is one thing that I tend to want to hold out for. Because, life is depressing enough to not go to a film and feel depressed. I feel depressed just by listening to the news-I don't need a movie to give me something else to be depressed about.
So, glad this movie exists, and I get where everyone is coming from.
Good show, everyone!
fireproof78 wrote:Jimmy B wrote:Nobody should want to watch The Raven. Try The Ice Harvest (directed by Harold Ramis), The Sure Thing (directed by Rob Reiner) or The Grifters (directed by Stephen Frears).
The Raven isn't a very good film. Is that enough explaining?
Isn't a very good film or a bad film? I like John Cusack and am a fan of Edgar Allan Poe so it sounds like an interesting play on his work...
Squiggly_P wrote:Also, rumour has it that Bryan Cranston is going to be the DC Universe Lex Luthor for a while. Six films at least.
Isn't this a normal Hollywood thing? Signing someone for a potential recurring character for a bunch of appearances, even if there's no current intention to use them that much?
Doesn't automatically mean that there will be 6 films with him in it.
Isn't that what they did with Sam Jackson for the Avengers?
Fireproof gets a like for mentioning Cheif O'brien. That is all.
Too kind, sir.
Quick funny note: my wife owns the entire series of Dr. Quinn: Medicine Woman. In the series pilot, Colm Meany plays the town barber, and kind of a rough around the edges kind of guy. Sadly, he was not kept for the series proper, but seeing him in the pilot still cracks me up.
As SF Debris put it in his "Encounter at Farpoint" review, "They are joined on the battle bridge by a curly haired guy. Don't worry, he's not important."
Nobody should want to watch The Raven. Try The Ice Harvest (directed by Harold Ramis), The Sure Thing (directed by Rob Reiner) or The Grifters (directed by Stephen Frears).
fireproof78 wrote:However, to list three would be Emperor's New Groove (I can watch that one again and again), Star Wars (the original) and Princess Bride, with George of the Jungle edging in there.
Wait, now I'm confused. I thought the 3 movies were the pinnacle ones from our childhood, TENG came out in 2000.
I'm still a child at heart. Like I said, I have a soft spot for children's movies, regardless of release date.
Fine, fine, play by the rules *sighs*
Star Wars, Aladdin and Princess Bride, with George of the Jungle tailing in there.
John Cusack is one of those actors I've not seen alot of. Grosse Point Blank and Con Air, that's about it.
I liked him in Con Air and Grosse Point Blank, but more so in Con Air. I think I liked him because he had a good foil in Colm Meany (Chief O'Brian!). However, I really haven't gotten in to anymore of his stuff, though reviewing his IMBD page makes me want to watch "The Raven"
So Mike's three movies are Ghostbusters, Annie and The Wizard of Oz. What about the rest of y'all?
So, I have a soft spot for most children's animated films (there are a list of exceptions but that is a whole other list ) so generally those can work for me.
However, to list three would be Emperor's New Groove (I can watch that one again and again), Star Wars (the original) and Princess Bride, with George of the Jungle edging in there.
Friends In Your Head | Forums → Posts by fireproof78
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 9 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
