You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Active topics Unanswered topics Mark all as read
Friends In Your Discord!
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!
Search options (Page 79 of 81)
Topics by Invid User defined search
Posts found: 1,951 to 1,975 of 2,003
Regarding Master and Commander:
Jeffery Harrell wrote:Really? I really liked the whole in medias res thing, I guess because it didn't scream "hey look we're trying to start a franchise."
And, usually, book series don't start off with that first meeting. An author comes up with a story set in the middle of the main character's lives, and only later when faced with either a lack of ideas or an aging cast goes back to do an origin story. Hornblower, The Stainless Steel Rat... even the Dragonriders of Pern books do this.
There's a difference between good and enjoyable, but this is a good movie to laugh at 
I wonder if, now that I've seen the film, its another case where I like it because I'm not too familiar with the books. I have the first collection but am more familiar with Sandman, which sort of shared this universe. There's definitely a case to be made that movies should be judged on their own with no regard to how they compare to the source material... although I'll continue to ignore things like From Hell because they seem to have missed the entire #$%&ing point of that book
Trey wrote:DorkmanScott wrote:But how many times have we heard and actor/filmmaker/whatever say "Oh, yeah, we totally fucked that last one up (even though in the early/promotional stages we said it was really good), but now that we're in the early/promotional stages of the next one, this one's really good. "
I'm gonna say... three times?
Wasn't the joke that Arnold would always say yes, the last picture had major problems, but his new one was the best ever?
maul2 wrote:Also does anyone know any other movies/books/comics whatever, along this same vein (God, demons, angels etc.) Cause I really love the shit out of this kinda stuff and I only had Supernatural before this, and I really want to find more like it.
Well, there's the Sandman comics for one, if you haven't read them. Constantine shows up in the first book, and his 18th Century ancestor has a larger role in later stories. I love John Carpenter's Prince of Darkness, where quantum mechanics helps prove Jesus came to warn us that God was from the anti-mater side of the universe (and thus evil to our point of view).
Zarban wrote:Altho it’s a great movie, I don’t buy some of the basic premise. In particular, I object to the idea that destroying several cities could bring about world peace; we already had two wars to end all wars, and it absolutely did not work. Why aren't the smartest, most powerful people in the world smarter than Harry Truman? Why not destroy just the heads of government, with the threat of destroying the next ones too if they don’t disarm?
The book ends with Ozzy talking to Dr.Manhattan about how rosy the future now is, and Dr. M commenting that nothing is forever. Ozzy gets a "wait, what?" look as the blue guy vanishes, and I always took it to mean in fact Ozzy failed. Yes, the immediate cold war crisis was defused, but within a decade humanity would be back to its old ways. The plan IS a bad one, and that's part of the point of the story.
Jeffery Harrell wrote:And now Disney is, for all intents and purposes, the marketing arm of Pixar.
It was a reverse takeover, similar to what happened with Apple. First Apple buys NEXT and puts Jobs in charge and changes the Mac OS into NEXT, then Disney buys Pixar and puts Lassiter and all the Pixar people in charge of the animation. Everyone wins.
When it looked like Disney was going to abandon animation (every movie in the 70's had a chance to be the last animated feature) the studio did take some out there chances on live action films. Black Hole, Tron, Dragonslayer... I honestly think if one had really hit it big we might have seen Disney pour their talent into out doing ILM, maybe hooking up with Henson to really do some far out stuff.
Jeffery Harrell wrote:The readers demanded plot and characters, and for their sins, they were given the Rama sequels..
I avoided them, as well as any post 2010 sequels
I think there's room for movies that are more about ideas than plots or characters. I'm damned if I can think of an example right now beyond 2001, but I think such a beast could be, if it were done right...
But this book isn't the one to try that with, because there are no ideas but that of a sense of discovery and not understanding. It would make a good 3D Imax film.
So much of the actual plot of Rama, though, is based on solar-political intrigue, and that spells death to a movie plot.
I suppose they could play up some elements, such as the one religious crew member, the simps, or the sex between crew members (only rule: don't do it in front of the simps). But, really, some books just shouldn't be adapted. Maybe they could do A Fall of Moondust instead.
downinfront wrote:Not the jokes, I mean the knowledge of the bad science.
I think they have science knowledge themselves, as it's not an uncommon thing to have Phil's site dealt with general themes where as the riff has lots of specific stuff. Not to say it wasn't one of their research tools, naturally. My favorite bits were noting that 1 is not in fact a prime number, and that their simulation of the core is in 2-D where as the real reactions will be occurring in a 3-D reality.
The same duo did a riff of Tale of Despereaux, which probably isn't as full of science...
Jeffery Harrell wrote:The great irony is that just as visual effects have gotten good enough that it might be possible to adapt "Rendezvous with Rama" for the screen, we've reached a sort of point where a story that contemplative and cerebral could never, ever work.
Having re-read Rama recently the big problem with it is there is no real plot or characters. It would be visually stunning, but nothing really happens and you end not knowing any answers. Now, I love the book but any movie would have to add a ton of stuff to it.
downinfront wrote:You have to pay two dollars for it?
That's surprising and a dealbreaker for me. I also wonder how much of their content is taken directly from this free site.
You pay for a Rifftrax, so yes the site they set up for fan created riffs have a price too (split 50/50 between the site and the creators). I can understand if you find it morally wrong Few actually make enough to even cover startup costs for equipment and such, but there are a few riffing groups that are great and well worth the price. Some also offer their riffs for free on their own site but sell them through Rifftrax instead of asking for donations.
As for lifting from the Bad Astronomer, I didn't see any direct stolen jokes. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy references were probably taken from the books though...
If anyone hasn't heard it, the iRiff of The Core is great They focus specifically on the bad science, which is the best part of this film.
http://www.rifftrax.com/iriffs/core
BrianFinifter wrote:Someday. Give us some time. The prequels and the Matrix sequels were only a few months ago.
It's been over 5 months since episode III, but I do understand having to space these things out
Trey wrote:But I can't see how being blond and British would have made any significant difference to the Constantine character. Maybe it mattered in some way in the comic, but it didn't matter at all to the story the movie was telling.
Naturally it didn't matter to that, as it was telling the story of this new character My sister has commented that there are lots of adaptations of Agatha Christie Miss Marple stories but very few actually have Miss Marple in them. The rest just have characters with that name.
Trey wrote:Invid wrote:It is one of those films where those familiar with the comic went, "they cast WHO as the British Constantine?" and just ignored the sucker. It'll be interesting to see if it holds up if you ignore the source material.
The blond British Constantine, from what I understand. In the special features they mention that they discussed dyeing Keanu's hair, and show a wardrobe test of Keanu in the comic-established brown coat, etc. But in the end they decided to leave his hair alone and make his coat non-canon black, because it just looked better on screen that way.
Which in the end, was the right choice - Constantine's hair and accent and jacket color don't make one damn difference to the story, it would have been silly to slavishly stick to trivial details just because that's how it was in the comic. Instead they just made the movie the best way they knew how. For me, it worked.
And that's fine, although there is the question of how much you can change a character before it's no longer that character. Lots of great movies totally ignore the source material, though.
We probably should hold off on more comments until they release it...
Trey wrote:Gregory Harbin wrote:Aims forced me to watch Constantine last night. I kinda loved it.
That right there? Exactly the sort of thing I was hoping would happen when we covered Constantine. Lots more people should kinda love that movie.
And we haven't even released the commentary yet... awesome!
It is one of those films where those familiar with the comic went, "they cast WHO as the British Constantine?" and just ignored the sucker. It'll be interesting to see if it holds up if you ignore the source material.
Maybe you could replace the iTunes podcast feed with a new one with all the episodes, ending with a pointer to the new Down in Front feed. I was amused, after downloading the Crystal Skull commentary via Zarban's, not to see it listed when I subscribed to Geekza.
You should trash a movie you don't like. As a listener maybe I would have liked to have at least one person who enjoyed it more sitting in with the group, but that person may not exist among you and I have no problem with that
No, I agree it did sound angrier and more bitter. Usually even when a movie is being trashed there's a sense of fun, and that was missing. I was even surprised when the sum up by everyone was that Avatar had reached the level of "good", as I wouldn't have guessed that after listening. It's like a review that trashes a film but still gives it three stars.
Just finished listening. Lots of interesting info, although I still love the movie (this was a fun change given the past "Cameron rules!" episodes). Couple comments:
1) Mechs are good! And, you don't build weapons into them because the one advantage of a vehicle with hands is you can pick up new weapons quickly. Hmm, I just realized the Macross/Avatar connection, as in Macross (the first part of Robotech for some of you) the big mechas were developed because the aliens were a race of giants.
2)Why is there just one Home Tree? There isn't. There's probably one per tribe, and there's probably thousands of tribes all over the planet. It probably takes a century or three to get one big enough to actually live in, so losing yours is a big deal and maybe even ends up killing most of the tribe (how many ants survive having their anthill dug up?)
3) No comment about how the whole place seems to have been designed by someone, which either is a huge hole in the plot or will be the main plot in future movies.
Ah, you're right. I was confused as the file for this one was 162 MB and Titanic was just 70 MB
emfayder wrote:Sorry for the delay everybody.
So the longest movie has the shortest notes? Interesting...
I think I saw it three time on the Imax, and will probably see the re-release if my sister can find a sitter (she couldn't the first time around). Flaws and all, it's just fun and the 3D did suck me in. It'll be interesting listening to the commentary which is just about downloaded (I don't have the DVD as it's one of those Netflix is being paid to delay renting for a month, but I think I know it well enough).
DorkmanScott wrote:So to reiterate, I've heard these arguments, but I have never seen a Christian provide a passage that contains modern knowledge that human beings at the time could not possibly have known. The Bible contains no such information. Likewise the page about the Quran, which in places is even more shameless in its apologetical retcons.
They're TRYING to do it, but obviously not well. It's taking poetry and twisting it into something literal, sort of like claiming there's some actual meaning to 2001 A Space Odyssey...
Posts found: 1,951 to 1,975 of 2,003
