You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Friends In Your Head | Forums → Posts by BigDamnArtist
I liked the Harry-Potter-esque bits of molten slag coming off the effect, myself. That's new.
I was actually going to say, I really liked that as well, added a really cool touch to it.
As for the episode as a whole:
It just lacked any sense of time whatsoever, and (I think) that was supposed to be the whole point of Trenzelor, it's this place the Doctor has spent centuries protecting and defending, and then it kills him. Except for the amount of time we actually see him there (in film grammar) and protecting it, it might as well be three weeks where the Doctor was aging super rapidly or something.
Anyways, tl;dr, the whole weight of Trenzelor that we got last season just feels lacking here. It's the doctor versus a couple bad guys, until he regenerates. I can't really see how it goes from (this episode) to the nuclear wasteland we saw before. But that might just me, I was hoping for more from Trenzelor.
I did really love the scene where the Doc basically lays out all the reasons why he can't regen again, just on a meta level, it feels like Moffat starring directly at the fans and going "Yes I know, now shut up and come on the ride."
But otherwise, the episode was solid. Loved Matt Smiths departure, (although the whole thing with seeing Amy kinda got a little indulgent, but hey he's leaving, I'll forgive it. And then yes, I love the instant switch over to Capaldi, made a nice shock moment (especially with the crazy eyes, he seriously looks like he could throttle Clara at any moment after he regens right there); and Matt Smith even set it up in his little Speech. "Just one second and you're changed." or something like that, it's in there.
Kinda curious to see what they're going to do with Gallifrey now, because obviously the search itself is basically over, Gallifrey found them. So is it now going to be a matter of trying to get them back into this universe without starting a war or what? Not sure. Truth be told I was kinda looking forward to the Indiana Doctor idea a lot of people were floating around after DoTD. The Doc out in the universe looking for clues to find Gallifrey and still having fun along the way without the weight of the Moment on him. -shrug- We'll find out I guess.
Merry Christmas everyone!!
It's still noon here so we haven't had our Christmas dinner yet (As far as I know it's not a traditional thing here for 2, I know people who do, but mostly there are other reasons, Saniss) but my family opens presents on Christmas Eve, so I got:
A very cool Zangrethor Digital styled leather notebook wrap that my dad made (I'll probably post a piccy later), a really nice engraved pen and mechanical pencil set, a little bit of cash, and the traditional (in my family) chocolate orange.
All in all very nice little Christmas so far, hope y'all are enjoying yours
BigDamnArtist wrote:You literally just described a gender swapped Arrested Development.
But with more boobs.
You have my interest.
You literally just described a gender swapped Arrested Development.
Alright. Pitch me Shameless in one sentence or less.
Not Christmassy in any way, but still important, and I'm really glad to see this being made.
I was really hoping that Smaug would keep his gold plating for the rest of the movies, ala Ed Harris' hand in The Abyss, and just be FAAAABulous looking for the rest of the series. Plus I would love to see Smaug just flying away shouting down "Another set of armour BIIIICTHESSSS, SUCK IT"
It would have been awesome.
It's all animated, and honestly it's really damn impressive. It doesn't feel awkward or out of place.
It helps that his head is like 90% mouth, so they get a lot of leeway out of the lips.
But yeah, the lip sync/animation of Smaug in general was really impressive, especially when he's being the smart creature, giving little smirks and talking to Bilbo, and not just being the monster flailing around.
And oh yeah, I was reeeeeeeeeeaaaaaly feeling the length by the time they left Lake Town (which is like an hour 50mins).
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
Hoooooboyo. This fuckin thing. Too start I will say, I didn't pay to see this, and I was (forcibly) dragged to see this by my family (who also did the aforementioned paying). I was fully set on not seeing this thing for a very very long time. I pretty much unilateral hated everything about the first one. I've ranted on that often, so if you've been around you've probably heard most of my arguments, short short version: The Hobbit completely failed, if it was even attempting in the first place, to set itself in the same universe as the Lord of The Rings, it is functionally a different universe, the laws of physics are different, the entire world treats itself like a cartoon, and on top of all that the story is just generally a clusterfuck of trying to cram in way to much shit. It's just horrible and damn near unwatchable, at least without my eyes permanently afixing themselves in a rolled back position.
Now. The Desolation of Smaug.
I didn't...hate it. I did not loathe every second in which I sat in that theater. So in that respect it has already surpassed my expectations. in fact there were several instances in which I actually found myself to be enjoying it.
I will say, it certainly feels far closer to be in the same universe as LoTR, there are only a very few brief moments in which the laws of physics break entirely in the ways the first one seemed to have a fetish for doing every 2 minutes. Tonally I think this one is a lot closer to the argument that people kept trying to cram down my throat about the first one. That being: Well it's a kids book so obviously it's going to be a lot less serious. DoS, I think manages to capture that idea without completely sacrificing the structural integrity of the universe. Personally I would say the perfect example of this is Stephen Frys character, the Master (Can't remember his actual title) of Laketown. Which btw, had no idea Fry was in this thing, made me very happy to see him. He's just this glutunous, bumbling, incompetent official (in a lot of ways he reminds me of the characters he plays in the various incarnations of Black Adder). He feels like this very broad, humourous sort of character, but he still feels like he lives in this world. It's just that this part of that world is a little less grim, and overwrought by darkness than say a similar sort of situation we see in Edoras in LoTR. Also just in the design of Lake Town itself, which I LOVED, it feels really rickety and kind of steampunky without divulging into cartoon proportions. There are more examples I could go into, but I think you get the idea.
Side note, I was totally getting PoTC flashbacks with Orlando Bloom running around port roy- Lake Town.
On the subject of things I really enjoyed, Smaug himself. Wow. Just wow. He looks spectacular. His performance is amazing, the rendering and shading on him is absolutely perfect, he looks real, so much more impressive than the playdough dragon we go in the trailer. Which btw, the shot we got in the trailer of Smaug rounding that pillar with Bilbo is actually seen in ring vision in the final movie, which to my mind makes me wonder why they put it as it was in the trailer at all? I almost wonder if it was intentionally left slightly playdoughey because they knew it was going to be smeared up with ring vision at the end. Just kinda made me wonder. Anyways, all that being said, Cumberbatch could have easily been replaced with anyone and we would not have noticed a difference. his voice was so completely effected that I honestly couldn't even tell it was him. Listening really really hard I could pick out a few brief spots where I could just barely pick him out of the effects, but it was at the point where it didn't even make a difference. Don't get me wrong, the performance is great, but it could have been anyone underneath all of the effects. The same goes for the performance, the fact that they managed to make Smaug talk without it looking totally weird is awesome, but outside of that it was just a dragon, I couldn't pick out any discernible Cumberbatch-ness to it whatsoever. (Granted: it might come through more on a repeat viewing, but as it stands, not so much)
On another note, fuck those spiders man. Just fuck them all. Uuuuuuugh.
The orcs this time, while you can still tell they're all digital if you look closely, do look a lot better this time. Although that doesn't change the fact that they're still all fucking digital.
As far as the rest of the movie, it's still pretty much a mess story and pacing wise. The movie rushes around at breakneck speed, we get almost no introduction/time with Beorn (spl?...the bear dude) other than exposition exposition exposition gtfo. (Plus, can I just point out, according to the film grammar that was being thrown at me, they ride those horses like 100 feet and then get off them, gee great job guys). But then later they s[pend like 5 minutes on a conversation with Tauriel and... I can't even remember his name, the cute dwarf let's call him, that goes almost no where and only serves to set up their romantic relationship, which is only an excuse to have her stay behind to help heal him, which is only an excuse to have Legolas get the shit beat of him. The pacing is all over the map, I think it really could have done some good to pull some time out of a few of the action sequences (The barrel sequence omg, just make it end) and put it into some character stuff.
I also discovered a really fun drinking game. Take a drink every time the Mirkwood elf king says a cliche bad guy line. You'll be plastered by the time we leave Mirkwood. It was getting painful.
Other random things. I didn't mind Radaghast in this one, he's only on screen for about 90 seconds of screentime, so that probably helps, and even then he still has some stupid business with the birds that kinda pissed me off.
While I say that the movie feels much more grounded visual, it does still feel VERY digital, because well, it is. With every passing minute I found myself missing the visual tone and feel of LoTR more and more. Not just the lack of minatures, although yes, but as time goes on I just can't can't stand this digital look, it makes everything feel fake, even the stuff that is real. It feels some backwards attempt to make everything feel more real by making it clearer and sharper, but all it does is make it feel fake.
I love the design of Lake Town. Absolutely adore it.
Is it just me or does Orlando Bloom have a much more rectangular head than he did in LoTR? He looks like a brick, it's bizarre.
All in all, I like this movie much more that I did AUJ, if the third one improves upon this one as much as this one did on AUj we might amost be back up to the level of LoTR. I liked parts of it, and as a whole the movie didn't make me want to incarnate it into human form just so I could strangle it to death. Take from that what you will.
On a side side side note. Seeing the Godzilla trailer on the big screen was an absolutely glorious thing to see, that movie looks like it's going to be beautiful in all the right ways.
@BDA - I agree, the narration was one of the high points for me. Although, I'm not familiar with the guy who did it and thought it was Adam West for a little while.
I didn't even know it was done by "SOMEBODY", I've always just found it marvelously well written and performed.
Who does do it?
This isn't to sound pretentious or snooty. It really is a film that can be hit or miss
Actually I was about to make a lot of the same points you just did.
My dad absolutely LOVES A Christmas Story, but it's basically about his childhood so he connected with it on that level, and then he grew up with it as well. So we watch it every year.
I enjoy it, it's a cute little movie about Christmas time and winter from the eyes of a kid, and obviously there's a lot in there that I think every kid can identify with, that one thing you really really want for Christmas but your parents say no, freezing your tongue to a pole etc. But it doesn't hit me the same way that it does my dad, just because it's not about me. Although the narration I think is probably the high point of it, or biggest selling point at least. It's got this very unique little vibe to it that you don't see very often. A lot of the narration feels very Douglas Adamsian to me for some reason. When i think of ACS, I usually tend to think about the narration first.
So yes, it's partly generational, partly individual taste, also, I have an inkling that it wouldn't work nearly so well for someone who didn't grow up somewhere where winter=snow and cold. There are so many jokes and just facts of life in ACS centered around winter life that if you didn't grow up with that, you couldn't relate/understand.
To the main question of the thread:
-As I just said, we always watch A Christmas Story, more for my dads benefit than mine (like I said, I enjoy it but it's not really required Christmas viewing EVERY year for me.
-National Lampoons Christmas - Absolutely a classic
-Muppet Christmas Carol (This is pretty much the biggest one for me, every year without fail, I love this movie)
-Sometimes the Grinch, varies between the cartoon and Jim Carey, although i mean honestly I've seen both of them so many times I don't really need to watch them again
-And I don't seek this one out usually, but if it's on tv I definitely won't turn it off; Mickey's Christmas Carol
Oh god no.
I'm not sure why we're talking about artistic integrity when the article is just about the Tolkien estate getting screwed on the back-end points.
Because I think we all know it's impossible to stay on topic for more than 5 posts in a row on this forum. It's a thing we do.
I'm so pumped I can't even.
Philosopher + Sorcerer = Philoserer
Personally I would have gone with Philocerer, but that's me.
Well that certainly would have made the...uh... pun (?) clearer.
No really Teague, tell us what you really think.
/joke
Seriously though. I'm just gonna let this one play out before I start making any judgements or start casting down the almighty hell fires of hades down upon the bastard Shia.
Waaaaay to many times does thing kind of thing wind up being some sensationalized misunderstanding or miscommunication.
Hey, Teague clearly says he'll fix "YOUR TYPOS" he says nothing of his own.
Lamer wrote:Squiggly_P wrote:Yeah you have. It's Groundhog Day meets Battle: LA.
If they explain the time loop in the same way Groundhog Day did then I'm on board.
If you look closely at frame #659, Tom Cruise is wearing Hermione's Time Turner necklace, which now also explains why she didn't use it later.
But they have an ENTIRE case of them at the ministry!1 Why didn't she just get another one!? GAH PEOPLE!!
And what's this about Nolan not putting any ideas into his movies? He's calved out a niche for himself as a director of cerebral blockbusters. The morals of surveillance, the prisoner's dilemma, dreams versus reality, fear as a tool of leadership, individual versus society, etc. Not all are perfectly executed, and he often bites off more than he can chew, but props for the ambition.
Obviously I can't explain this properly, cause that's not even close to what I was saying, but I truly don't care enough to try again.
Suffice to say, this is the TEASER, not even an actual trailer. There's still another YEAR of marketing that I'm sure will be filled with all sorts of footage and whatever else you could want. Make up your mind with those, no one ever said you had to give him your money based on this alone.
I was literally running out the door as I was typing that and it came out way more pretentious than I intended.
I don't mean to say "ideas" as in "it's about ideeeaaaas maan." but that it has one very central idea or message that it really wants to convey to the audience. In this case we need to get off our asses and get out into the universe again.
I (personally) don't think Inception (or Alien even) has anything like that. They're both very action-y set piece driven (alien less so, but still true) films, so teasing them by literally teasing those set pieces is the obvious way to go for those. But there isn't some ...thing... that the film as a whole is trying to tell the audience. (um... don't go to deep into your own subconscious, cause like, shit gets real man. Aliens that want to eat you are bad, k guyz.) Whereas Interstellar feels like something that is more about instilling that sense of "get up and go" into the audience as main driving force of the film itself.
Granted, if that's not what the film is about, then fuck me, but just going off of what he's given us so far, that's the movie he's (at least telling us) he's making. I don't think it's fair to call out a teaser trailer as a bad teaser, for a movie you know almost nothing about, simply because it isn't telling you what those others one did. Especially when this movie may be EXACTLY what this teaser is telling us it is.
Isn't that the point of a teaser? For whoever's in control to give you a small insight into what the movie will be like? All we have to go on is what he's giving us. For all you know, the stuff you think should be in a teaser may not even exist in the movie. Whether that's a good or a bad thing you can decide for yourself, but that doesn't mean it's a bad teaser for THIS MOVIE.
/rant
EDIT: On second read, i have no idea if this even makes it clearer, but ehh, I'm too tired to care.
Friends In Your Head | Forums → Posts by BigDamnArtist
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 9 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.