macgawd's Recent Comments
Director for Earth Stood Still Talks GORT - Jul 08, 2008 - 12:23pm
Sorry, but the changes made to this re-make render the entire plot laughably absurd. The original posited a rational explanation for Klaatu's warning of the impending destruction of the earth: The newly Nuclear-capable human race is now beginning to explore outer space, and the more advanced alien civilizations don't want Humanity to spread its war mongering ways into outer space. In this new era of the Church of Global Warming, where so-called 'climate change' has become the new Red Scare, every new movie with a doomsday plot has to revolve around human carelessness towards the environment. The question is, why would advanced alien civilizations give a rats ass about global warming on an insignificant planet earth? Answer: Because Hollywood never seems to tire of reminding us how morally superior it is to the rest of the world, and it's why I won't watch this turd. =M=
Sorry, but the changes made to this re-make render the entire plot laughably absurd. The original posited a rational explanation for Klaatu's warning of the impending destruction of the earth: The newly Nuclear-capable human race is now beginning to explore outer space, and the more advanced alien civilizations don't want Humanity to spread its war mongering ways into outer space. In this new era of the Church of Global Warming, where so-called 'climate change' has become the new Red Scare, every new movie with a doomsday plot has to revolve around human carelessness towards the environment. The question is, why would advanced alien civilizations give a rats ass about global warming on an insignificant planet earth? Answer: Because Hollywood never seems to tire of reminding us how morally superior it is to the rest of the world, and it's why I won't watch this turd. =M=
TV Review: BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Revelations - Jun 17, 2008 - 10:46am
Actually, after thinking about it, I think that the final episodes are going to play out like this: The Humans and Cylons will explore the ruins of "Earth", only to find that it was destroyed by a devastating war between Humans and the machines they created, a la "The Matrix". The few survivors of this war left Earth to colonize the planet Kobol, where they created a new race of servile androids. After millennia, this new race of machines began to perceive themselves as human, and spread out to create the 12 Colonies, where they once again began the cycle of creating machines that would spell their own destruction. "All this has happened before". The conclusion: Humans and Cylons are the same--all progeny of the same original race from the "13the Colony" --Earth. =M=
Actually, after thinking about it, I think that the final episodes are going to play out like this: The Humans and Cylons will explore the ruins of "Earth", only to find that it was destroyed by a devastating war between Humans and the machines they created, a la "The Matrix". The few survivors of this war left Earth to colonize the planet Kobol, where they created a new race of servile androids. After millennia, this new race of machines began to perceive themselves as human, and spread out to create the 12 Colonies, where they once again began the cycle of creating machines that would spell their own destruction. "All this has happened before". The conclusion: Humans and Cylons are the same--all progeny of the same original race from the "13the Colony" --Earth. =M=
TV Review: BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Revelations - Jun 17, 2008 - 10:24am
While I'm glad they moved the "hidden cylons" plot forward to its ultimate reveal, it was pretty anticlimactic, and only confirmed for me the ugly, inevitable truth: that Humans and Cylons are going to live in peace and harmony with each other, logic and continuity be damned. The confrontation between Adama and Tighe over his nature was interesting, in that it asked the one question that's been burning in my mind since the end of season 3: How could Tighe be a Cylon when Adama has known him for 30 years--back when he had hair? The standard response is that he's a "different kind of Cylon", but until this gets explained in a meaningful way, it's nothing more than a cop out for having yanked the plot and continuity out from under the show at the end of season 2. Since there are a considerable number of episodes left, I'm not convinced that they have reached Earth--only what they *believe* to be Earth. Realizing what they've found was a sterile, post-nuclear wasteland, it seems doubtful that they'll try to colonize it--perhaps it is only an unmarked outpost on the way to Earth? If this really is meant to be Earth, then I have no idea where they're going to take the show, having played the Earth card so soon in the final season. Are we going to be treated to another boring rehash of the New Caprica colonization arc? Or, my worst fears confirmed: A Lord of the Flies-type winner-take-all war on earth between Humans and Cylons, where only one Human and one Cylon remain = Adam & Eve? =M=
While I'm glad they moved the "hidden cylons" plot forward to its ultimate reveal, it was pretty anticlimactic, and only confirmed for me the ugly, inevitable truth: that Humans and Cylons are going to live in peace and harmony with each other, logic and continuity be damned. The confrontation between Adama and Tighe over his nature was interesting, in that it asked the one question that's been burning in my mind since the end of season 3: How could Tighe be a Cylon when Adama has known him for 30 years--back when he had hair? The standard response is that he's a "different kind of Cylon", but until this gets explained in a meaningful way, it's nothing more than a cop out for having yanked the plot and continuity out from under the show at the end of season 2. Since there are a considerable number of episodes left, I'm not convinced that they have reached Earth--only what they *believe* to be Earth. Realizing what they've found was a sterile, post-nuclear wasteland, it seems doubtful that they'll try to colonize it--perhaps it is only an unmarked outpost on the way to Earth? If this really is meant to be Earth, then I have no idea where they're going to take the show, having played the Earth card so soon in the final season. Are we going to be treated to another boring rehash of the New Caprica colonization arc? Or, my worst fears confirmed: A Lord of the Flies-type winner-take-all war on earth between Humans and Cylons, where only one Human and one Cylon remain = Adam & Eve? =M=
TV Review: BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Hub - Jun 10, 2008 - 11:20am
Gauleyboy, Believe me when I say with all sincerity, that no one wants to enjoy BSG more than I do. Seasons 1 and 2, and even parts of 3 rank as some of my all time favorite TV, but IMO the show has seriously gone off the rails, and this last season has been almost unbearable. This particular episode was the first time in a long time I enjoyed watching BSG. I realize that you love the show with a passion regardless of its blemishes, but when I watch it now, I feel like I've been betrayed. I can't help but be critical of a show that once held so much promise. Don't take it personally. =M=
Gauleyboy, Believe me when I say with all sincerity, that no one wants to enjoy BSG more than I do. Seasons 1 and 2, and even parts of 3 rank as some of my all time favorite TV, but IMO the show has seriously gone off the rails, and this last season has been almost unbearable. This particular episode was the first time in a long time I enjoyed watching BSG. I realize that you love the show with a passion regardless of its blemishes, but when I watch it now, I feel like I've been betrayed. I can't help but be critical of a show that once held so much promise. Don't take it personally. =M=
TV Review: BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Hub - Jun 10, 2008 - 10:07am
Everyone here pretty much knows how I feel about BSG nowadays, but I have to admit that I liked this episode. What I liked: The writing on this episode seemed a lot tighter--maybe because it was solely focused on the mission, and didn't jump around to the various (and tedious) subplots. I also liked how it tied in with last week's episode, by showing how (and why) the Raptor jumped back to Galactica. The scenes with Roslyn and Baltar trying in vain to communicate with the Hybrid--a much needed humorous moment in what has been an oppressively drear show. The team up with the Cylons and Humans. Accepting the direction BSG has taken, I think I would have liked to see the friction between the Cylons and Human pilots play out a little longer than it did. The attack against the Resurrection Hub. Any time BSG ramps up the action is a good thing, and this had some beautiful FX shots. The reuniting of Roslyn and Adama. The chemistry between Mary McDonell and Ed Olmos is so good, they don't even really need lines to read. What I didn't like: This episode pretty much confirmed my suspicions on the direction of the show, in which they attempt to de-fang the Cylons by making them no different than the Humans. =M=
Everyone here pretty much knows how I feel about BSG nowadays, but I have to admit that I liked this episode. What I liked: The writing on this episode seemed a lot tighter--maybe because it was solely focused on the mission, and didn't jump around to the various (and tedious) subplots. I also liked how it tied in with last week's episode, by showing how (and why) the Raptor jumped back to Galactica. The scenes with Roslyn and Baltar trying in vain to communicate with the Hybrid--a much needed humorous moment in what has been an oppressively drear show. The team up with the Cylons and Humans. Accepting the direction BSG has taken, I think I would have liked to see the friction between the Cylons and Human pilots play out a little longer than it did. The attack against the Resurrection Hub. Any time BSG ramps up the action is a good thing, and this had some beautiful FX shots. The reuniting of Roslyn and Adama. The chemistry between Mary McDonell and Ed Olmos is so good, they don't even really need lines to read. What I didn't like: This episode pretty much confirmed my suspicions on the direction of the show, in which they attempt to de-fang the Cylons by making them no different than the Humans. =M=
Spoiler Revealed in New HANCOCK Trailer - Jun 04, 2008 - 07:19am
Am I the only one disturbed at how studios seem to want to give away all the important surprises and plot twists in their trailers before the movie even arrives in theaters? Hell, most of the time, the plots are so thin than once you've seen the trailer, you've seen the movie. As far as 'Hancock' goes, not sure how I feel about it. It looks like it could be fun, but as Wiseguy points out, the largest criticism seems to be that it is all over the place, unsure of what it wants to be. Looks like a renter to me. =M=
Am I the only one disturbed at how studios seem to want to give away all the important surprises and plot twists in their trailers before the movie even arrives in theaters? Hell, most of the time, the plots are so thin than once you've seen the trailer, you've seen the movie. As far as 'Hancock' goes, not sure how I feel about it. It looks like it could be fun, but as Wiseguy points out, the largest criticism seems to be that it is all over the place, unsure of what it wants to be. Looks like a renter to me. =M=
INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL - May 23, 2008 - 01:39pm
Flickman writes, "the knight only said that the grail couldn't pass the seal. Said nothing about anyone who drinks from the grail. Continuity busted." Wrong again. Seriously--have you even watched "Last Crusade"? Earlier in the film, Indy relates the story of the Templar Knight who stumbled out of the cave 150 years after the Crusades, dropping dead of extreme old age. Continuity restored. =M=
Flickman writes, "the knight only said that the grail couldn't pass the seal. Said nothing about anyone who drinks from the grail. Continuity busted." Wrong again. Seriously--have you even watched "Last Crusade"? Earlier in the film, Indy relates the story of the Templar Knight who stumbled out of the cave 150 years after the Crusades, dropping dead of extreme old age. Continuity restored. =M=
INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL - May 23, 2008 - 11:15am
Flickman writes, "I also had a problem with Indy's dad being dead. He drank from the Holy Grail, which brings you eternal life. Last time I checked, eternal meant "Forever". I see this mentioned all the time by people who claim to be Indy fans, and it's clear that they haven't been paying attention to the movies they watch. In 'Last Crusade', the price for immortality from drinking from the Grail was that you could never leave the cave--once you passed the great seal at the entrance of the cave, you were mortal again. They explain this quite clearly in the movie, so there's no break in continuity. As far as the new flick, I haven't seen it, have no intention of seeing it, so I have no opinion. It sounds though like it's a pretty mixed bag, and disappointing over all. Pretty much sums up what I expected, since there was no need for a new one outside of a blatant cash grab, and this will grab all sorts of $$$ =M=
Flickman writes, "I also had a problem with Indy's dad being dead. He drank from the Holy Grail, which brings you eternal life. Last time I checked, eternal meant "Forever". I see this mentioned all the time by people who claim to be Indy fans, and it's clear that they haven't been paying attention to the movies they watch. In 'Last Crusade', the price for immortality from drinking from the Grail was that you could never leave the cave--once you passed the great seal at the entrance of the cave, you were mortal again. They explain this quite clearly in the movie, so there's no break in continuity. As far as the new flick, I haven't seen it, have no intention of seeing it, so I have no opinion. It sounds though like it's a pretty mixed bag, and disappointing over all. Pretty much sums up what I expected, since there was no need for a new one outside of a blatant cash grab, and this will grab all sorts of $$$ =M=
Mel Brooks Talks New SMART - May 22, 2008 - 08:16am
Whiskey, I agree that movie reviews are somewhat subjective. However, what they've done to the characters, and the type of writing the script delivers is a good indication that the movie isn't respectful to the original series, and fans of that series are going to hate it. The producers of this movie are on record belittling the original concept as a "silly Cold War comedy" that needed "serious updating". If that's all they saw, then we're in trouble. They've changed the main character of Maxwell Smart from an egomaniacal agent convinced of his own genius, to a once-obese, nerdy CONTROL analyst who dreams of being an agent, but is too aware of his own ineptitude. It's a complete 180 from the original character. Whereas the original TV show used intelligent writing to get laughs, the script for this movie has reduced it to the level of Austin Powers, replete with fart and vomit jokes, sexual innuendo, and cookie-cutter plot contrivances. It might get a few laughs, but it isn't "Get Smart" by any stretch of the imagination. Sad they have to dumb everything down for today's audience.
Whiskey, I agree that movie reviews are somewhat subjective. However, what they've done to the characters, and the type of writing the script delivers is a good indication that the movie isn't respectful to the original series, and fans of that series are going to hate it. The producers of this movie are on record belittling the original concept as a "silly Cold War comedy" that needed "serious updating". If that's all they saw, then we're in trouble. They've changed the main character of Maxwell Smart from an egomaniacal agent convinced of his own genius, to a once-obese, nerdy CONTROL analyst who dreams of being an agent, but is too aware of his own ineptitude. It's a complete 180 from the original character. Whereas the original TV show used intelligent writing to get laughs, the script for this movie has reduced it to the level of Austin Powers, replete with fart and vomit jokes, sexual innuendo, and cookie-cutter plot contrivances. It might get a few laughs, but it isn't "Get Smart" by any stretch of the imagination. Sad they have to dumb everything down for today's audience.
Top 10 Worst Shows That Need a Remake - May 22, 2008 - 07:55am
I can remember watching every single one of these shows. Cheesy? Hell yes! Awful? Hell no! Looking back, I think that the '80's was an amazing time for experimental TV shows, and while most of these shows are based on silly concepts, they at least had heart. At that time, it seems that Hollywood was at least willing to throw just about anything against the wall to see what would stick--nowadays, all we get are cookie-cutter crime dramas and "reality" TV. Lame. Give me Lee Van Cleef as a Ninja any day.
I can remember watching every single one of these shows. Cheesy? Hell yes! Awful? Hell no! Looking back, I think that the '80's was an amazing time for experimental TV shows, and while most of these shows are based on silly concepts, they at least had heart. At that time, it seems that Hollywood was at least willing to throw just about anything against the wall to see what would stick--nowadays, all we get are cookie-cutter crime dramas and "reality" TV. Lame. Give me Lee Van Cleef as a Ninja any day.
Mel Brooks Talks New SMART - May 22, 2008 - 07:30am
It surprises me that Mel Brooks is praising this movie, since by all accounts the new flick butchers the original concept. Some of the early screenings have indicated that the new 'Get Smart' is a complete mess, with its plot almost a carbon copy of "Johnny English"--and we all know what a hit that was. For fans of the original TV show, they'll be disappointed, even angry at how they've treated Maxwell Smart and the other characters, who seem to bear no resemblance to the originals beyond the use their names. While the original TV series was a smartly written satire of covert government agencies like the CIA, and used intelligent, funny writing to get laughs, the movie plays up the action to compensate for a poor script that is low on intelligence, and high on scatalogical humor and other Hollywood cliche' This movie has been in development since 1999--not a good sign, and I also hear that WB is being sued by the Adams estate, which holds rights to the 'Get Smart' property. I smell another bomb for WB.
It surprises me that Mel Brooks is praising this movie, since by all accounts the new flick butchers the original concept. Some of the early screenings have indicated that the new 'Get Smart' is a complete mess, with its plot almost a carbon copy of "Johnny English"--and we all know what a hit that was. For fans of the original TV show, they'll be disappointed, even angry at how they've treated Maxwell Smart and the other characters, who seem to bear no resemblance to the originals beyond the use their names. While the original TV series was a smartly written satire of covert government agencies like the CIA, and used intelligent, funny writing to get laughs, the movie plays up the action to compensate for a poor script that is low on intelligence, and high on scatalogical humor and other Hollywood cliche' This movie has been in development since 1999--not a good sign, and I also hear that WB is being sued by the Adams estate, which holds rights to the 'Get Smart' property. I smell another bomb for WB.
Iron Scribes Penning HIGHLANDER Remake - May 21, 2008 - 07:23am
If there is one constant in Hollywood, it is that this remake (if it materializes) will be a slick, high budget production with top notch CGI and big names, but it won't hold a candle to the original, because it will never have the spirit and magic of that 1980s classic. It will be like all Hollywood retreads: beautifully shot, but sterile and soulless. =M=
If there is one constant in Hollywood, it is that this remake (if it materializes) will be a slick, high budget production with top notch CGI and big names, but it won't hold a candle to the original, because it will never have the spirit and magic of that 1980s classic. It will be like all Hollywood retreads: beautifully shot, but sterile and soulless. =M=
George Lucas Talks INDY 5 - May 19, 2008 - 03:24pm
Raiders was that rare lightning-in-a-bottle movie, where the right people with the right idea came together at the right time, to create something really special. As far as I'm concerned, all subsequent Indy movies are pale reflections of the original, and were just attempts to cash in on this uniqueness. Indy IV is certainly no exception. Not surprisingly, all the early reviews of Indy IV have ranged from bland to dismal, with the common thread being that it is too slow, too predictable, and too slick. It seems all to apparent that they're trying too hard to make an "Indy" movie, and the original idea--paying homage to the 1930's action serials--has lost all its charm and spirit. I have seen nothing from the latest Indy flick to make me even remotely interested in seeing a 65-year-old actor trying to recapture his glory days, and two aging directors pump a dry well.
Raiders was that rare lightning-in-a-bottle movie, where the right people with the right idea came together at the right time, to create something really special. As far as I'm concerned, all subsequent Indy movies are pale reflections of the original, and were just attempts to cash in on this uniqueness. Indy IV is certainly no exception. Not surprisingly, all the early reviews of Indy IV have ranged from bland to dismal, with the common thread being that it is too slow, too predictable, and too slick. It seems all to apparent that they're trying too hard to make an "Indy" movie, and the original idea--paying homage to the 1930's action serials--has lost all its charm and spirit. I have seen nothing from the latest Indy flick to make me even remotely interested in seeing a 65-year-old actor trying to recapture his glory days, and two aging directors pump a dry well.
CW Gives REAPER Renewal - May 13, 2008 - 07:01am
I absolutely love, love, love this show, and couldn't be happier that it got renewed! Ray Wise is great as the Devil, and while the writing can be hit-or-miss, the last few episodes were amazing.
I absolutely love, love, love this show, and couldn't be happier that it got renewed! Ray Wise is great as the Devil, and while the writing can be hit-or-miss, the last few episodes were amazing.
SPEED RACER - May 09, 2008 - 07:20am
I guess you have to have a soft spot for the 60's cartoon to enjoy this movie. What surprises me the most is how the critics pan this movie for not being more than it ever promised to be: a visually stunning adaptation of a pioneering anime' cartoon. Does it have the Mach 5? Check. Does it have Speed Racer, Trixie, Pops, Spritle, Chim-Chim, and Racer X? Check. Are there high-stakes races in which the Mach 5 must employ its James Bond-like gadgets to win the race? Check. So what's the problem? Honestly--why do people have such high expectations from this film, when the Watchowski's never promised anything more than a kid-friendly movie faithful to the source material? At what point was "Speed Racer" promised to be a dramatic tour de force? Oh, and BTW--the Indy 500 has precisely 4 turns.
I guess you have to have a soft spot for the 60's cartoon to enjoy this movie. What surprises me the most is how the critics pan this movie for not being more than it ever promised to be: a visually stunning adaptation of a pioneering anime' cartoon. Does it have the Mach 5? Check. Does it have Speed Racer, Trixie, Pops, Spritle, Chim-Chim, and Racer X? Check. Are there high-stakes races in which the Mach 5 must employ its James Bond-like gadgets to win the race? Check. So what's the problem? Honestly--why do people have such high expectations from this film, when the Watchowski's never promised anything more than a kid-friendly movie faithful to the source material? At what point was "Speed Racer" promised to be a dramatic tour de force? Oh, and BTW--the Indy 500 has precisely 4 turns.
DVD Shopping Bag: Indiana Jones, Box Set and Blu-Ray - May 07, 2008 - 09:21am
Are these going to be available individually, or as a box set only? I only really want 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'--could care less about the other two.
Are these going to be available individually, or as a box set only? I only really want 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'--could care less about the other two.
TERMINATOR 4 is PG-13? - May 05, 2008 - 10:07am
I guess rather than question a PG-13 Terminator, I'm questioning why there needs to be another Terminator movie in the first place? T2 wrapped things up neatly enough for me, and I haven't seen T3 for that reason. They may as well make the new one rated G, 'cause I'm not gonna watch it.
I guess rather than question a PG-13 Terminator, I'm questioning why there needs to be another Terminator movie in the first place? T2 wrapped things up neatly enough for me, and I haven't seen T3 for that reason. They may as well make the new one rated G, 'cause I'm not gonna watch it.
New Trailer for Shyamalan's HAPPENING Online - May 05, 2008 - 07:53am
I disagree, Necro. M. Knight had a great vision for storytelling, but has unfortunately fallen victim to his own hype. "The Sixth Sense" was great, as was "Unbreakable". Signs was, I think, the point in which his movies began the downward spiral into mediocrity. While I thought that "Signs" was strong over all, the ending was very weak, and "The Village" is where I lost all love for M. Knight. The ridiculous contrivances of "The Village" were just too much to take, and "Lady in the Water was such a self-indulgent piece of crap that I refuse to watch any more of his movies, regardless of how beautifully they are filmed.
I disagree, Necro. M. Knight had a great vision for storytelling, but has unfortunately fallen victim to his own hype. "The Sixth Sense" was great, as was "Unbreakable". Signs was, I think, the point in which his movies began the downward spiral into mediocrity. While I thought that "Signs" was strong over all, the ending was very weak, and "The Village" is where I lost all love for M. Knight. The ridiculous contrivances of "The Village" were just too much to take, and "Lady in the Water was such a self-indulgent piece of crap that I refuse to watch any more of his movies, regardless of how beautifully they are filmed.
HULK Gets Angry in New Online Photos - May 01, 2008 - 07:11am
I thought this was a reboot of the Hulk franchise, but from looking at the latest trailer, it looks like a continuation from Lee's Hulk, which I find weird, since they've re-cast the entire thing. As one of the relatively few who like Ang Lee's Hulk, I'm not sure how I feel about this one. It's definitely more comic book-y and action-oriented than the first, but the scope of it just doesn't feel as big (no pun intended). The look and feel remind me of a made-for-cable movie or DtDVD. While a lot of people are harping on the effects, and the look of the new Hulk, but I don't really see a problem there--I'm just having a hard time getting excited about this one. Don't know why exactly.
I thought this was a reboot of the Hulk franchise, but from looking at the latest trailer, it looks like a continuation from Lee's Hulk, which I find weird, since they've re-cast the entire thing. As one of the relatively few who like Ang Lee's Hulk, I'm not sure how I feel about this one. It's definitely more comic book-y and action-oriented than the first, but the scope of it just doesn't feel as big (no pun intended). The look and feel remind me of a made-for-cable movie or DtDVD. While a lot of people are harping on the effects, and the look of the new Hulk, but I don't really see a problem there--I'm just having a hard time getting excited about this one. Don't know why exactly.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Escape Velocity - Apr 29, 2008 - 06:55pm
Gauleyboy, it isn't the writer's attempt to criticize our government that I find offensive, it is the utterly unimaginative, ham-fisted manner in which they do it. Yes, there's a war in Iraq, and an occupation that's going badly, and an administration that has its head buried in the sand while it works to strip Americans of their personal freedoms. I get it. We're all aware of it, because we see it on the news 24/7, and in any number of shitty movies based on same-- all of which have tanked at the BO, for the same reason: It's old news, and people are tired of being preached at by Hollywood. Moore could have used the opportunity BSG afforded him to accentuate the better aspects of human nature *in spite of* endless war and oppression. Instead, we get beat over the head with the same tired, transparent rhetoric. Maybe you find it enlightening, but I find it trite and boring.
Gauleyboy, it isn't the writer's attempt to criticize our government that I find offensive, it is the utterly unimaginative, ham-fisted manner in which they do it. Yes, there's a war in Iraq, and an occupation that's going badly, and an administration that has its head buried in the sand while it works to strip Americans of their personal freedoms. I get it. We're all aware of it, because we see it on the news 24/7, and in any number of shitty movies based on same-- all of which have tanked at the BO, for the same reason: It's old news, and people are tired of being preached at by Hollywood. Moore could have used the opportunity BSG afforded him to accentuate the better aspects of human nature *in spite of* endless war and oppression. Instead, we get beat over the head with the same tired, transparent rhetoric. Maybe you find it enlightening, but I find it trite and boring.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Escape Velocity - Apr 29, 2008 - 06:27pm
Hanso, thanks for being reasonable enough to accept someone expressing views critical of a show that I once thought was the best thing on television. That being said, I find it comical that people immediately assume that because I'm critical of the show, that I must be angry, or, as you say, in need of a hug. Am I disappointed in how the show has evolved? Absolutely. I think in the long run, BSG will be recognized for what it was: a missed opportunity, due in large part to the lazy writing that inevitably results from blind praise and a decided lack of constructive criticism. But am I angry? Not in the least. It is after all just a tv show, and the reason I continue to watch is morbid curiosity--that, and the fact that I don't have much else to do on a Friday night. After all, maybe I'll be surprised, and they'll turn it all around before the end comes. I'd certainly love for that to happen, and I'd be happy to come here and admit that I was impatient, and foolish to doubt the show.
Hanso, thanks for being reasonable enough to accept someone expressing views critical of a show that I once thought was the best thing on television. That being said, I find it comical that people immediately assume that because I'm critical of the show, that I must be angry, or, as you say, in need of a hug. Am I disappointed in how the show has evolved? Absolutely. I think in the long run, BSG will be recognized for what it was: a missed opportunity, due in large part to the lazy writing that inevitably results from blind praise and a decided lack of constructive criticism. But am I angry? Not in the least. It is after all just a tv show, and the reason I continue to watch is morbid curiosity--that, and the fact that I don't have much else to do on a Friday night. After all, maybe I'll be surprised, and they'll turn it all around before the end comes. I'd certainly love for that to happen, and I'd be happy to come here and admit that I was impatient, and foolish to doubt the show.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Escape Velocity - Apr 29, 2008 - 01:33pm
Gauleyboy, good science fiction parallels the real world in though-provoking and innovative ways, great science fiction explores Human nature, and celebrates its best qualities--BSG does neither of these. Its socio-political parallels are an unimaginative pastiche of anti-Bush Administration Liberal propaganda, from the invasion and occupation of New Caprica (the occupation of Iraq), to the everyman President-turned-quasi-dictator Roslin, using "National Security" as a blanket excuse to circumvent due process and curtail personal freedoms (the Patriot Act, GITMO, etc.). Instead of exploring the admirable quality of Humanity's ability to adapt, and its will to overcome insurmountable odds without sacrificing their morality, BSG would rather wallow in its own self-imposed misery. It's one thing to want to parallel the real world, but quite another to present a world that is so heavy-handed and devoid of a single moment of joy or light heartedness that it becomes impossible to feel any empathy for the characters.
Gauleyboy, good science fiction parallels the real world in though-provoking and innovative ways, great science fiction explores Human nature, and celebrates its best qualities--BSG does neither of these. Its socio-political parallels are an unimaginative pastiche of anti-Bush Administration Liberal propaganda, from the invasion and occupation of New Caprica (the occupation of Iraq), to the everyman President-turned-quasi-dictator Roslin, using "National Security" as a blanket excuse to circumvent due process and curtail personal freedoms (the Patriot Act, GITMO, etc.). Instead of exploring the admirable quality of Humanity's ability to adapt, and its will to overcome insurmountable odds without sacrificing their morality, BSG would rather wallow in its own self-imposed misery. It's one thing to want to parallel the real world, but quite another to present a world that is so heavy-handed and devoid of a single moment of joy or light heartedness that it becomes impossible to feel any empathy for the characters.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Escape Velocity - Apr 29, 2008 - 12:46pm
Well gauleyboy, you sure nailed me. I'm angry. I'm miserable. That's why I don't like BSG anymore. It' doesn't have anything to do with the plot bait-and-switch, the gaping logic holes, insufferably depressing characters, or the predictable and consistently bad writing. This may come as a surprise to you, but I watch sci-fi television in order to be entertained, not to be assaulted by ham-fisted scenes that "parallel the real world". If I want to be continuously depressed by stories of religious-motivated atrocities, political oppression, and a world devoid of hope or distinction between good and evil, I'll just turn on the news.
Well gauleyboy, you sure nailed me. I'm angry. I'm miserable. That's why I don't like BSG anymore. It' doesn't have anything to do with the plot bait-and-switch, the gaping logic holes, insufferably depressing characters, or the predictable and consistently bad writing. This may come as a surprise to you, but I watch sci-fi television in order to be entertained, not to be assaulted by ham-fisted scenes that "parallel the real world". If I want to be continuously depressed by stories of religious-motivated atrocities, political oppression, and a world devoid of hope or distinction between good and evil, I'll just turn on the news.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Escape Velocity - Apr 29, 2008 - 12:03pm
Jetro, yes, I remember such incidents, however these made more sense in the context that Baltar was undergoing some sort of psychosis, where he could have just as easily smacked his own head into the mirror as a result of a guilt-induced hallucination. Yet the last incident left no doubt that Six is not a result of psychosis (an explanation that made better sense in light of Baltar's involvement in the genocide of Humanity), but is instead some as-yet unexplained physical manifestation. Also problematic is the interaction between Tigh and Six model held in the brig. Is Tigh hallucinating, or are the Cylons now more than machines, possessing some sort of paranormal powers? This show grows increasingly convoluted with each episode.
Jetro, yes, I remember such incidents, however these made more sense in the context that Baltar was undergoing some sort of psychosis, where he could have just as easily smacked his own head into the mirror as a result of a guilt-induced hallucination. Yet the last incident left no doubt that Six is not a result of psychosis (an explanation that made better sense in light of Baltar's involvement in the genocide of Humanity), but is instead some as-yet unexplained physical manifestation. Also problematic is the interaction between Tigh and Six model held in the brig. Is Tigh hallucinating, or are the Cylons now more than machines, possessing some sort of paranormal powers? This show grows increasingly convoluted with each episode.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Escape Velocity - Apr 29, 2008 - 11:13am
Actually, one of the few things I disliked about the OS was the arcane language used to replace units of time (centons, etc.), and the silly, made-up "swear words" like "Frak" and "Felgercarb". I was glad to see the new BSG abandon the time units, and for most of the first couple of seasons, kept the use of "Frak" to a minimum. Now, it seems like the writers must have received a mandate that they must use "Frak" X-number of times per episode, and in as many stupid ways possible. "I just wanna Frak", "Motherfrakker" = dumbed down pandering. Reminds me of the unintentionally hilarious dubbed-for-tv version of "Pulp Fiction", in which Jules calls one of his victims a "stupid melonfarmer".
Actually, one of the few things I disliked about the OS was the arcane language used to replace units of time (centons, etc.), and the silly, made-up "swear words" like "Frak" and "Felgercarb". I was glad to see the new BSG abandon the time units, and for most of the first couple of seasons, kept the use of "Frak" to a minimum. Now, it seems like the writers must have received a mandate that they must use "Frak" X-number of times per episode, and in as many stupid ways possible. "I just wanna Frak", "Motherfrakker" = dumbed down pandering. Reminds me of the unintentionally hilarious dubbed-for-tv version of "Pulp Fiction", in which Jules calls one of his victims a "stupid melonfarmer".
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Escape Velocity - Apr 29, 2008 - 10:31am
What I originally loved so much about BSG was how it took the concepts of the OS and tweaked them just enough to be different and interesting, but not so far from the original that it shouldn't share the name "Battlestar Galactica", and maybe that's my real beef with how Moore has handled this show. Despite its often campy appearance, the OS remains one of my all-time favorite sci-fi shows, and I really enjoyed how the new series handled itself, up until the end of season 3. For me, the show began to tank when it was no longer about Humanity's struggle to survive against the never ending onslaught of Cylon oppression, but about how gosh darn alike Humans and Cylons really are, with the practical annihilation of the entire Human race dismissed as a "learning experience". The quest for Earth is now barely a secondary tangent on BSG, with the bulk of every episode of season 4 so far taken up by religious nonsense and endless in-fighting, both with the Humans and the Cylons. It's intolerable.
What I originally loved so much about BSG was how it took the concepts of the OS and tweaked them just enough to be different and interesting, but not so far from the original that it shouldn't share the name "Battlestar Galactica", and maybe that's my real beef with how Moore has handled this show. Despite its often campy appearance, the OS remains one of my all-time favorite sci-fi shows, and I really enjoyed how the new series handled itself, up until the end of season 3. For me, the show began to tank when it was no longer about Humanity's struggle to survive against the never ending onslaught of Cylon oppression, but about how gosh darn alike Humans and Cylons really are, with the practical annihilation of the entire Human race dismissed as a "learning experience". The quest for Earth is now barely a secondary tangent on BSG, with the bulk of every episode of season 4 so far taken up by religious nonsense and endless in-fighting, both with the Humans and the Cylons. It's intolerable.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Escape Velocity - Apr 29, 2008 - 08:08am
Necroskippy, I know that Baltar's message was very opposed to traditional Christian theology, which is why I said it was a parody of the Sermon on the Mount. Just as Baltar's profanation of the religious service was a parody of Jesus turning over the tables of the moneychangers in the Temple, and his unresisted abuse at the hands of the security guard is a parody of Jesus' admonition to turn the other cheek. This ham-fisted religious nonsense was all utterly predictable from the pre-season photo of the BSG characters posing in a parody of Da Vinci's "Last Supper". For those who wonder why I keep watching? First, it was because I loved the show so much for seasons 1, 2, and most of 3, and a hope that they would get the show back on track. Since this clearly isn't going to happen, it is now out of morbid curiosity to see if my worst fears will be realized. Sadly, I haven't been disappointed in this regard.
Necroskippy, I know that Baltar's message was very opposed to traditional Christian theology, which is why I said it was a parody of the Sermon on the Mount. Just as Baltar's profanation of the religious service was a parody of Jesus turning over the tables of the moneychangers in the Temple, and his unresisted abuse at the hands of the security guard is a parody of Jesus' admonition to turn the other cheek. This ham-fisted religious nonsense was all utterly predictable from the pre-season photo of the BSG characters posing in a parody of Da Vinci's "Last Supper". For those who wonder why I keep watching? First, it was because I loved the show so much for seasons 1, 2, and most of 3, and a hope that they would get the show back on track. Since this clearly isn't going to happen, it is now out of morbid curiosity to see if my worst fears will be realized. Sadly, I haven't been disappointed in this regard.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Escape Velocity - Apr 29, 2008 - 07:32am
"Thought provoking"? Sure. It provoked thoughts like, "who writes this crap?" Not only is the writing boring and predictable (gosh, who could have predicted the improbable turn of Baltar as a Jesus-figure, and that he'd give some lame parody of the Sermon on the Mount?), but it is quickly spiraling into outright stupidity. Last week's episode gave us great writing in Starbuck telling Anders, "I just wanna frak!", which made my eyes roll so far back into my head, I could see my brain. This week, the Six that was supposedly in Baltar's head is not a figment of his imagination, but some unseen being, capable of physically interacting with matter, yet no one seems to question, or even notice this invisible force picking Baltar up like a rag doll. Every single character on Battlestar Galactica has has turned into an insufferable asshole with no redeeming qualities. I really don't get how anyone can consistently give this show an A+, unless they've lost all objectivity.
"Thought provoking"? Sure. It provoked thoughts like, "who writes this crap?" Not only is the writing boring and predictable (gosh, who could have predicted the improbable turn of Baltar as a Jesus-figure, and that he'd give some lame parody of the Sermon on the Mount?), but it is quickly spiraling into outright stupidity. Last week's episode gave us great writing in Starbuck telling Anders, "I just wanna frak!", which made my eyes roll so far back into my head, I could see my brain. This week, the Six that was supposedly in Baltar's head is not a figment of his imagination, but some unseen being, capable of physically interacting with matter, yet no one seems to question, or even notice this invisible force picking Baltar up like a rag doll. Every single character on Battlestar Galactica has has turned into an insufferable asshole with no redeeming qualities. I really don't get how anyone can consistently give this show an A+, unless they've lost all objectivity.
First Look Featurette for HANCOCK - Apr 24, 2008 - 06:52am
Looks like fun. Don't know if it's worth my $$ to see it in the theater though--might wait for DVD.
Looks like fun. Don't know if it's worth my $$ to see it in the theater though--might wait for DVD.
First Look Featurette for HANCOCK - Apr 24, 2008 - 06:45am
goatartist, log in, go up to "my mania", then click on "edit profile". There, you can upload a new avatar of your choosing.
goatartist, log in, go up to "my mania", then click on "edit profile". There, you can upload a new avatar of your choosing.
New SW: CLONE WARS Pics Online - Apr 23, 2008 - 07:32am
The animation style is a bit strange looking, but I don't mind it. What I do mind is that I saw a bit of bootlegged action from this on YT about a week ago, and I was horrified. If you think the animation looks wooden, the voice-acting is absolutely terrible. My only hope is that it was not finished, because all I could think about was that the God-awful acting of the Prequels must have been intentional, and that Lucas wants to carry that tradition to the new animated series, too.
The animation style is a bit strange looking, but I don't mind it. What I do mind is that I saw a bit of bootlegged action from this on YT about a week ago, and I was horrified. If you think the animation looks wooden, the voice-acting is absolutely terrible. My only hope is that it was not finished, because all I could think about was that the God-awful acting of the Prequels must have been intentional, and that Lucas wants to carry that tradition to the new animated series, too.
Potterverse Threatened - Apr 21, 2008 - 09:58am
It isn't uncommon for such claims to arise due to the lucrative popularity of such work, but I've not heard that Rowling "borrowed" or otherwise copied her idea for Harry Potter from anywhere or anyone. Regarding this case, I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that Vander Ark had assured Rowling that he had no intentions of publishing a lexicon, but went ahead with it anyway, despite the agreement. In any event, as the sole creator of the Harry Potter universe, I have no qualms about her suing the bejeezus out of these folks, and making as much profit off of her creation as she can.
It isn't uncommon for such claims to arise due to the lucrative popularity of such work, but I've not heard that Rowling "borrowed" or otherwise copied her idea for Harry Potter from anywhere or anyone. Regarding this case, I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that Vander Ark had assured Rowling that he had no intentions of publishing a lexicon, but went ahead with it anyway, despite the agreement. In any event, as the sole creator of the Harry Potter universe, I have no qualms about her suing the bejeezus out of these folks, and making as much profit off of her creation as she can.
Michael Stahl-David Responds to CLOVERFIELD 2 - Apr 18, 2008 - 06:50am
I though Cloverfield was a really fun movie, and I liked the hand-held gimmick (I don't get motion sick easily). I've only seen it once, so I don't know if it would be as enjoyable a second time, and this has me wondering how they'll handle a sequel. The rumor that they're just considering doing it from another hand-held perspective seems like going over the same ground, but I like BryanWay's idea of the news crew following the monster. However they do it, I hope they avoid the same pitfalls that the "Blair Witch" folks fell into with their sequel. What an abortion that was.
I though Cloverfield was a really fun movie, and I liked the hand-held gimmick (I don't get motion sick easily). I've only seen it once, so I don't know if it would be as enjoyable a second time, and this has me wondering how they'll handle a sequel. The rumor that they're just considering doing it from another hand-held perspective seems like going over the same ground, but I like BryanWay's idea of the news crew following the monster. However they do it, I hope they avoid the same pitfalls that the "Blair Witch" folks fell into with their sequel. What an abortion that was.
Harrison Ford Open to a Fifth INDIANA - Apr 17, 2008 - 06:20pm
I can see the brainstorming session at Skywalker Ranch now...."Gee, how can we make Indiana Jones 4 fresh and innovative? I know, we'll introduce a young kid as a sidekick, who may or may not be the secret love child of Indy and Marion! Focus groups show that sidekicks are always a winner! Then, instead of Nazi's, we'll do Commies, and instead of some Judeo-Christian artifact, we'll do Alien civilizations! Throw in the usual caves, booby traps, whip-swinging action, and it's Box Office Gold!" Yawn. If folks like you and Ponyboy are willing to plunk down your $10 plus the cost of a box of Junior Mints to see the same movie you've already seen 3 times, then be my guest, but I reserve the right to criticize your eagerness to line the pockets of studios that produce nothing but garbage, aimed squarely at the lowest common denominator.
I can see the brainstorming session at Skywalker Ranch now...."Gee, how can we make Indiana Jones 4 fresh and innovative? I know, we'll introduce a young kid as a sidekick, who may or may not be the secret love child of Indy and Marion! Focus groups show that sidekicks are always a winner! Then, instead of Nazi's, we'll do Commies, and instead of some Judeo-Christian artifact, we'll do Alien civilizations! Throw in the usual caves, booby traps, whip-swinging action, and it's Box Office Gold!" Yawn. If folks like you and Ponyboy are willing to plunk down your $10 plus the cost of a box of Junior Mints to see the same movie you've already seen 3 times, then be my guest, but I reserve the right to criticize your eagerness to line the pockets of studios that produce nothing but garbage, aimed squarely at the lowest common denominator.
Harrison Ford Open to a Fifth INDIANA - Apr 17, 2008 - 02:14pm
So far, I've been called an "elitist", a "douchebag", and a "puke", all for having only made the rational observation that the reason Hollywood continues to churn out garbage is because people mindlessly pay money to watch whatever crap they put on the screen. I guess some people enjoy watching the same crappy story and action over and over and over again, which is why I suppose studios greenlight shitfest franchises like "Fast & The Furious". I'm not excited about Indy 4, because I haven't seen anything that looks like it's going to bring anything new or innovative to the franchise. Maybe you don't mind watching a retread of the last 3 Indy movies, but if I want to watch Indiana Jones swing from a whip, fight bad guys, and discover the power of some supernatural object, I'll just pop in the original.
So far, I've been called an "elitist", a "douchebag", and a "puke", all for having only made the rational observation that the reason Hollywood continues to churn out garbage is because people mindlessly pay money to watch whatever crap they put on the screen. I guess some people enjoy watching the same crappy story and action over and over and over again, which is why I suppose studios greenlight shitfest franchises like "Fast & The Furious". I'm not excited about Indy 4, because I haven't seen anything that looks like it's going to bring anything new or innovative to the franchise. Maybe you don't mind watching a retread of the last 3 Indy movies, but if I want to watch Indiana Jones swing from a whip, fight bad guys, and discover the power of some supernatural object, I'll just pop in the original.
Harrison Ford Open to a Fifth INDIANA - Apr 17, 2008 - 11:41am
Yep, that's right--because I don't want to waste my hard earned money on Hollywood schlock, or shamelessly revisit the same lame story over and over, I'm now an "Elitist". By following the logic (or lack thereof) of Ponyboy, Gauleyboy, et al, I should celebrate the fact that instead of investing in original and compelling stories, Hollywood gives us endless carbon-copies of the same movie, predictable, horrifyingly soulless remakes of classics, and in the case of the latest Indy flick, shameless money grabs. Yessiree, instead of being critical, I should just hand over my $$$ and smile the vacant smile of the Fanboy. No thanks. I think I'll go read a book instead.
Yep, that's right--because I don't want to waste my hard earned money on Hollywood schlock, or shamelessly revisit the same lame story over and over, I'm now an "Elitist". By following the logic (or lack thereof) of Ponyboy, Gauleyboy, et al, I should celebrate the fact that instead of investing in original and compelling stories, Hollywood gives us endless carbon-copies of the same movie, predictable, horrifyingly soulless remakes of classics, and in the case of the latest Indy flick, shameless money grabs. Yessiree, instead of being critical, I should just hand over my $$$ and smile the vacant smile of the Fanboy. No thanks. I think I'll go read a book instead.
Harrison Ford Open to a Fifth INDIANA - Apr 17, 2008 - 09:18am
Ponyboy, It's sad to see you set the bar so low. People like you are precisely the reason why Hollywood continues to churn out shit movies.
Ponyboy, It's sad to see you set the bar so low. People like you are precisely the reason why Hollywood continues to churn out shit movies.
Harrison Ford Open to a Fifth INDIANA - Apr 17, 2008 - 06:57am
When I'm asked what my favorite movie is, my thoughts always immediately turn to "Raiders of the Lost Ark", which is, IMO, a perfect film. The subsequent chapters of the Indiana Jones adventures I felt were OK, but always felt they were mere shadows of the original, just trying to cash in on the popularity of the first and best of the series. It's why I'm somewhat apathetic towards this new installment--I haven't seen or heard anything about it that makes me excited to see it, and what I have seen just looks like Lucas, Ford, and Spielberg trying to relive their glory days, retreading the same material once again.
When I'm asked what my favorite movie is, my thoughts always immediately turn to "Raiders of the Lost Ark", which is, IMO, a perfect film. The subsequent chapters of the Indiana Jones adventures I felt were OK, but always felt they were mere shadows of the original, just trying to cash in on the popularity of the first and best of the series. It's why I'm somewhat apathetic towards this new installment--I haven't seen or heard anything about it that makes me excited to see it, and what I have seen just looks like Lucas, Ford, and Spielberg trying to relive their glory days, retreading the same material once again.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Six of One - Apr 15, 2008 - 01:34pm
First off, there's the basic premise for the entire show: The Cylon nuclear attack on the 12 Colonies, which left a mere 42,000 souls left to escape the relentless, merciless Cylon genocide. Gone are the intensely focused Cylons who viewed Humanity as heretics who deserve death for their blasphemies against the "One True God"; instead of having a plan, we get doubting, angst-ridden Cylons who just want to share their faith and live in harmony with the Humans. So the calculated and intentional deaths of billions of people was just the Cylon's way of evangelizing their new religion? Talk about bait and switch. Then there's Hera, the half-breed love child between Helo and Boomer. Once considered miraculous, and so important to Humanity, she's now, well...I don't know. Apparently, since in an improbable twist Chief Tyrol is now a Cylon, having a Human/Cylon baby isn't that special anymore, so the Hera thing has been downplayed, if not dropped altogether. Then there's the God awful repetitive and predicable writing. Who would suspect that Starbuck would return from the dead with a story no one would believe, get thrown in the Brig, only to be released by Adama in an "Aw, shucks--I never really doubted you" moment? Or, in one of his self-pitying moods, Apollo would abandon his military career for a job he doesn't want, only to return once again to the cockpit of a viper in some future episode of Season 4? The Cylons are right: this HAS all happened before.
First off, there's the basic premise for the entire show: The Cylon nuclear attack on the 12 Colonies, which left a mere 42,000 souls left to escape the relentless, merciless Cylon genocide. Gone are the intensely focused Cylons who viewed Humanity as heretics who deserve death for their blasphemies against the "One True God"; instead of having a plan, we get doubting, angst-ridden Cylons who just want to share their faith and live in harmony with the Humans. So the calculated and intentional deaths of billions of people was just the Cylon's way of evangelizing their new religion? Talk about bait and switch. Then there's Hera, the half-breed love child between Helo and Boomer. Once considered miraculous, and so important to Humanity, she's now, well...I don't know. Apparently, since in an improbable twist Chief Tyrol is now a Cylon, having a Human/Cylon baby isn't that special anymore, so the Hera thing has been downplayed, if not dropped altogether. Then there's the God awful repetitive and predicable writing. Who would suspect that Starbuck would return from the dead with a story no one would believe, get thrown in the Brig, only to be released by Adama in an "Aw, shucks--I never really doubted you" moment? Or, in one of his self-pitying moods, Apollo would abandon his military career for a job he doesn't want, only to return once again to the cockpit of a viper in some future episode of Season 4? The Cylons are right: this HAS all happened before.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Six of One - Apr 15, 2008 - 11:11am
Well gaulyboy, since this is the final season of BSG, I'd say that not only does the fact that I loved seasons 1, 2, and most of 3 show that I'm not just a "hater", but saying that I'm "bored with it" because it's been a "measly" 3 seasons is asinine. I'm clearly in it for the long haul, and over all, I've loved the show. It has only been since the intelligence-insulting reveal of the Hidden Four, the predictable death/resurrection of Starbuck, the improbable character twist of Baltar becoming some sort of messianic figure, and the endless moaning and groaning and in-fighting from the Cylons about their destiny (which, btw, not to long ago, we were told "they have a plan"--apparently they do not, and neither does Moore), that I have become disenchanted with BSG. This nonsense about the show being "a journey", to try and cover up the gaping plot holes and forgotten story arcs, ironically, speaks to your own OCD; if you think that this new season so far is the greatest thing on TV, then you're obviously easily distracted, and have forgotten how great this show used to be. Saying the BSG is the best show on TV isn't saying much, in a wasteland of reality shows and cookie-cutter crime dramas.
Well gaulyboy, since this is the final season of BSG, I'd say that not only does the fact that I loved seasons 1, 2, and most of 3 show that I'm not just a "hater", but saying that I'm "bored with it" because it's been a "measly" 3 seasons is asinine. I'm clearly in it for the long haul, and over all, I've loved the show. It has only been since the intelligence-insulting reveal of the Hidden Four, the predictable death/resurrection of Starbuck, the improbable character twist of Baltar becoming some sort of messianic figure, and the endless moaning and groaning and in-fighting from the Cylons about their destiny (which, btw, not to long ago, we were told "they have a plan"--apparently they do not, and neither does Moore), that I have become disenchanted with BSG. This nonsense about the show being "a journey", to try and cover up the gaping plot holes and forgotten story arcs, ironically, speaks to your own OCD; if you think that this new season so far is the greatest thing on TV, then you're obviously easily distracted, and have forgotten how great this show used to be. Saying the BSG is the best show on TV isn't saying much, in a wasteland of reality shows and cookie-cutter crime dramas.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Six of One - Apr 15, 2008 - 09:04am
Ponyboy, As someone who originally loved BSG, I have the right to comment on what I don't like about the direction of the show. You don't like it? Suck it. That said, anyone who thinks that the season 3 and season 4 so far is great television "bar none" must be easily entertained by watching paint dry. There is nothing interesting or compelling about the utterly predictable direction the show is taking, and it makes me sad. I keep watching, because I keep hoping to be pleasantly surprised. Ill also keep commenting on what sucks, because there's got to be someone to take the alternative view from those like you who fawn over the shit sandwich that Moore keeps feeding you.
Ponyboy, As someone who originally loved BSG, I have the right to comment on what I don't like about the direction of the show. You don't like it? Suck it. That said, anyone who thinks that the season 3 and season 4 so far is great television "bar none" must be easily entertained by watching paint dry. There is nothing interesting or compelling about the utterly predictable direction the show is taking, and it makes me sad. I keep watching, because I keep hoping to be pleasantly surprised. Ill also keep commenting on what sucks, because there's got to be someone to take the alternative view from those like you who fawn over the shit sandwich that Moore keeps feeding you.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: Six of One - Apr 15, 2008 - 07:05am
Sadly, I've lost all interest in BSG. It has become too mired in its own metaphysical nonsense, illogical plot twists, and Melrose Place-like melodrama for me to care what happens anymore. The great scenes like the interaction between Roslin and Adama are too few and far between, and with Moore's insistence upon disintegrating any distinction between Human and Cylon, what's the point? If Moore is going to force the contrivance that the Humans and Cylons ultimately have the same goal, and in the end learn to live together in peace and harmony, then IMO, the entire show was a waste of time.
Sadly, I've lost all interest in BSG. It has become too mired in its own metaphysical nonsense, illogical plot twists, and Melrose Place-like melodrama for me to care what happens anymore. The great scenes like the interaction between Roslin and Adama are too few and far between, and with Moore's insistence upon disintegrating any distinction between Human and Cylon, what's the point? If Moore is going to force the contrivance that the Humans and Cylons ultimately have the same goal, and in the end learn to live together in peace and harmony, then IMO, the entire show was a waste of time.
Sneak Peek at JERICHO'S Series Finale - Mar 26, 2008 - 10:00am
I really don't get why CBS didn't push this show, with the over-arcing story of government coverup and corruption, it's thinly veiled parallels between the "Allied States of America" and the Bush Administration, and its connections with big corporations like Halliburton (Jennings & Rall) and private paramilitary "security" firms like Blackwater USA (Ravenwood). Go figure.
I really don't get why CBS didn't push this show, with the over-arcing story of government coverup and corruption, it's thinly veiled parallels between the "Allied States of America" and the Bush Administration, and its connections with big corporations like Halliburton (Jennings & Rall) and private paramilitary "security" firms like Blackwater USA (Ravenwood). Go figure.
First still of STAR TREK'S Enterprise online - Jan 18, 2008 - 12:42pm
Some geek on AICN claims that according to some old Star Trek compendium, the USS Enterprise was built on earth at the San Francisco shipyards, disassembled, then reassembled in space for its final outfitting and shakedown. Personally, I don't care where they built the ship--I'm more concerned with what I'm reading about the plot, character development and direction of the movie, which seems to be taking extreme liberties with the established Trek universe. I'm no Trekkie by any means, but I have always been a huge fan of the show, and I have no interest in seeing anyone but Shatner play Kirk, and I certainly have no interest in a movie that's going to play fast and loose with what we are supposed to already know about Kirk.
Some geek on AICN claims that according to some old Star Trek compendium, the USS Enterprise was built on earth at the San Francisco shipyards, disassembled, then reassembled in space for its final outfitting and shakedown. Personally, I don't care where they built the ship--I'm more concerned with what I'm reading about the plot, character development and direction of the movie, which seems to be taking extreme liberties with the established Trek universe. I'm no Trekkie by any means, but I have always been a huge fan of the show, and I have no interest in seeing anyone but Shatner play Kirk, and I certainly have no interest in a movie that's going to play fast and loose with what we are supposed to already know about Kirk.
"I've seen things..." - Dec 19, 2007 - 07:14am
From my point of view, the only tenuous link to Deckard being a replicant is that of the Origami unicorn and Deckard "dreaming" of a unicorn--suggesting that this was an implanted memory, and that Gaff knew about it. However, if Deckard is a replicant, why does he not share the strength and agility of the replicants? More importantly, if Deckard is a replicant, what value does the climactic rooftop scene with Roy have anymore, since Deckard is no different than him? Sorry, but Deckard = Replicant is about as stupid and nonsensical as the Force = Midichlorians.
From my point of view, the only tenuous link to Deckard being a replicant is that of the Origami unicorn and Deckard "dreaming" of a unicorn--suggesting that this was an implanted memory, and that Gaff knew about it. However, if Deckard is a replicant, why does he not share the strength and agility of the replicants? More importantly, if Deckard is a replicant, what value does the climactic rooftop scene with Roy have anymore, since Deckard is no different than him? Sorry, but Deckard = Replicant is about as stupid and nonsensical as the Force = Midichlorians.
"I've seen things..." - Dec 18, 2007 - 02:08pm
Blade Runner + Deckard being human? A great noir tale that ponders the question, "what makes us human"? Blade Runner + Deckard being a replicant? A long, pointless story with enough logic holes to drive a fleet of trucks through. I could give a rats ass about what Ridley Scott thinks now, after so many re-do's of this movie. He clearly wants Deckard to be a replicant, and knows that it didn't play out that way in the original script. So, like another rich, spoiled Director we all know, he's simply gone back and re-edited the movie to suit his own sensibilities, continuity and logic be damned. CappyMorgan--teachers don't teach anymore--they proselytize.
Blade Runner + Deckard being human? A great noir tale that ponders the question, "what makes us human"? Blade Runner + Deckard being a replicant? A long, pointless story with enough logic holes to drive a fleet of trucks through. I could give a rats ass about what Ridley Scott thinks now, after so many re-do's of this movie. He clearly wants Deckard to be a replicant, and knows that it didn't play out that way in the original script. So, like another rich, spoiled Director we all know, he's simply gone back and re-edited the movie to suit his own sensibilities, continuity and logic be damned. CappyMorgan--teachers don't teach anymore--they proselytize.
Pine's KIRK Comes with Orion Slave Girls - Dec 10, 2007 - 04:19pm
Are you sure that isn't Steve Austin, the 6 Million Dollar Man in that '70's leisure suit? Each new spoiler that comes out for this Star Trek movie has "bomb" written all over it. I have yet to read or see anything about this film that doesn't make me cringe.
Are you sure that isn't Steve Austin, the 6 Million Dollar Man in that '70's leisure suit? Each new spoiler that comes out for this Star Trek movie has "bomb" written all over it. I have yet to read or see anything about this film that doesn't make me cringe.
The Top 10 Worst Genre Films of All Time - Dec 10, 2007 - 04:16pm
Sorry, but I have to again emphasize that Star Wars ep. I, II, and III are utter rubbish. Granted they might have a smattering of good action scenes between them, but that cannot make up for the terrible wooden acting and unspeakable dialogue. I tried very hard to like these prequels, but they're just plain bad--especially "The Phantom Menace", which is completely and hopelessly unwatchable. Whether Ridley Scott thinks Deckard is a replicant is not really relevant, since the creator of the character, Philip K. Dick, says otherwise. One could, I suppose, argue that the film adaptation is a different version, but imagine someone producing a film version of Shakespeare's "Hamlet" in which the Prince of Denmark is an alien refugee from another planet, and asserting that this version is definitive! Making Deckard a replicant unravels the entire premise of the film.
Sorry, but I have to again emphasize that Star Wars ep. I, II, and III are utter rubbish. Granted they might have a smattering of good action scenes between them, but that cannot make up for the terrible wooden acting and unspeakable dialogue. I tried very hard to like these prequels, but they're just plain bad--especially "The Phantom Menace", which is completely and hopelessly unwatchable. Whether Ridley Scott thinks Deckard is a replicant is not really relevant, since the creator of the character, Philip K. Dick, says otherwise. One could, I suppose, argue that the film adaptation is a different version, but imagine someone producing a film version of Shakespeare's "Hamlet" in which the Prince of Denmark is an alien refugee from another planet, and asserting that this version is definitive! Making Deckard a replicant unravels the entire premise of the film.
The Top 10 Worst Genre Films of All Time - Dec 10, 2007 - 02:25pm
Agree with the list, save for number 10. How could anyone love the theatrical release of Blade Runner, with its annoying narrative that only serves to explain what we've just seen--as if we're too retarded to figure things out for ourselves? IMO, nothing in the DC remotely suggests that Deckard is a replicant, and even if it did, having him as a replicant doesn't make a lick of sense. I haven't read the original book, but from what I understand, even Philip K. Dick denies that Deckard is a replicant, so 'nuff said on that subject. Star Wars Ep. I, II, III? Awful. Just awful. And finally, for the record the little girl from Aliens is called "Newt", not "Knute".
Agree with the list, save for number 10. How could anyone love the theatrical release of Blade Runner, with its annoying narrative that only serves to explain what we've just seen--as if we're too retarded to figure things out for ourselves? IMO, nothing in the DC remotely suggests that Deckard is a replicant, and even if it did, having him as a replicant doesn't make a lick of sense. I haven't read the original book, but from what I understand, even Philip K. Dick denies that Deckard is a replicant, so 'nuff said on that subject. Star Wars Ep. I, II, III? Awful. Just awful. And finally, for the record the little girl from Aliens is called "Newt", not "Knute".
First SPEED RACER Trailer - Dec 07, 2007 - 04:05pm
Allow me to attempt to inject some reason into this discussion: since no one has yet seen this movie, no one can rationally claim, based solely on this trailer, that it will "Suck", "Rock", or "Bomb". As a kid, I loved watching "Speed Racer". As an adult, I found the cartoon to pale in comparison to my memories of it as a child, with the ridiculous dialogue and character voicing, and the cookie-cutter plots. But it's a cartoon--it ain't Shakespeare, and the Wachowski bros. have not promised to deliver anything more than a live-action Speed Racer faithful to the original concept, and from what I've seen so far, they don't disappoint. Moreover, from what I've read, this movie is intended for kids, just like the original. For those offering the disparaging comparison to "Spy Kids", I have only one question to ask: What audience was "Spy Kids" aimed at? Sophisticated (used loosely for some) adults, or pre-teen kids? As far as the "ground-breaking" visuals, I have to admit that when I first heard about this project, I wasn't at all interested. After seeing this trailer, I am definitely in line to see this movie, if for no other reason than to enjoy the fantastic "live cartoon" world they've created for Speed.
Allow me to attempt to inject some reason into this discussion: since no one has yet seen this movie, no one can rationally claim, based solely on this trailer, that it will "Suck", "Rock", or "Bomb". As a kid, I loved watching "Speed Racer". As an adult, I found the cartoon to pale in comparison to my memories of it as a child, with the ridiculous dialogue and character voicing, and the cookie-cutter plots. But it's a cartoon--it ain't Shakespeare, and the Wachowski bros. have not promised to deliver anything more than a live-action Speed Racer faithful to the original concept, and from what I've seen so far, they don't disappoint. Moreover, from what I've read, this movie is intended for kids, just like the original. For those offering the disparaging comparison to "Spy Kids", I have only one question to ask: What audience was "Spy Kids" aimed at? Sophisticated (used loosely for some) adults, or pre-teen kids? As far as the "ground-breaking" visuals, I have to admit that when I first heard about this project, I wasn't at all interested. After seeing this trailer, I am definitely in line to see this movie, if for no other reason than to enjoy the fantastic "live cartoon" world they've created for Speed.
New Video Online for THE MUMMY 3 - Nov 21, 2007 - 09:24am
Sorry, but without Rachel Weisz, what's the point? She was the only reason I watched the first two.
Sorry, but without Rachel Weisz, what's the point? She was the only reason I watched the first two.
Hasbro Clarifies G.I JOE Storyline - Nov 05, 2007 - 09:00pm
Meh. I'd rather see a movie based on the original (and in my opinion the only) G.I. Joe. I always thought the '80s version of G.I. Joe was retarded and lame.
Meh. I'd rather see a movie based on the original (and in my opinion the only) G.I. Joe. I always thought the '80s version of G.I. Joe was retarded and lame.
BIONIC WOMAN: The Education of Jamie Sommers - Oct 26, 2007 - 01:05pm
I know how you feel. The interesting part of the story--the bit with the mind control chips--seems to have just been a contrivance to get Jamie and the CIA dude together. Too bad, too--the mind control chip idea had a lot of potential, and they just threw it away. I so want this show to be good--it has the potential to be, but so far it is either mediocre or just plain bad. I don't see a second season for this if the writers don't start actually writing.
I know how you feel. The interesting part of the story--the bit with the mind control chips--seems to have just been a contrivance to get Jamie and the CIA dude together. Too bad, too--the mind control chip idea had a lot of potential, and they just threw it away. I so want this show to be good--it has the potential to be, but so far it is either mediocre or just plain bad. I don't see a second season for this if the writers don't start actually writing.
Chris Pine is Kirk in STAR TREK - Oct 16, 2007 - 09:13am
It doesn't matter who's starring in this project, because the movie will bomb: not only are they treading on sacred ground by re-casting the iconic figures of the classic Star Trek adventures, worst of all, they are simply not bringing anything new to the game, but are instead re-hashing the same tired "altered timeline" scenario played out countless times before in various incarnations of Star Trek. It's just not fun or interesting anymore. IMO, the only reason to see this movie is for novelty's sake--to see how a re-cast crew of the Enterprise compares to the originals. That said, since movie studios are only interested in opening Box Office numbers, novelty alone might be enough to turn a modest profit and convince the mindless masses that $$$ = a good movie.
It doesn't matter who's starring in this project, because the movie will bomb: not only are they treading on sacred ground by re-casting the iconic figures of the classic Star Trek adventures, worst of all, they are simply not bringing anything new to the game, but are instead re-hashing the same tired "altered timeline" scenario played out countless times before in various incarnations of Star Trek. It's just not fun or interesting anymore. IMO, the only reason to see this movie is for novelty's sake--to see how a re-cast crew of the Enterprise compares to the originals. That said, since movie studios are only interested in opening Box Office numbers, novelty alone might be enough to turn a modest profit and convince the mindless masses that $$$ = a good movie.
Cho as Sulu, Pegg as Scotty in STAR TREK - Oct 12, 2007 - 09:49am
I don't put a lot of stock in these stories being true. Nevertheless, as a moderate Trek fan, I can't see how this project is going to do anything but end badly. TOS is part of American pop culture, and "reimagining" it is only going to expose how little reverence J.J. Abrams has for the source material.
I don't put a lot of stock in these stories being true. Nevertheless, as a moderate Trek fan, I can't see how this project is going to do anything but end badly. TOS is part of American pop culture, and "reimagining" it is only going to expose how little reverence J.J. Abrams has for the source material.
What the LOGAN'S RUN Remake Could Have Been - Oct 08, 2007 - 09:09am
All I know is this: My parents took me to see Star Wars when I was 10 in 1979, and I thought it was the greatest movie ever made. Cut to several decades later when Lucas released the "Star Wars: Special Edition" into theaters: I had not seen these movies since I was a kid, and holy crap, was I appalled at how cheesy the dialog was! "Laser brain"? "Scruffy looking Nerf Herder"? WTF?! The only saving grace of these movies is the actors themselves, who were miraculously able to deliver atrocious dialog and make it seem natural. Regardless of Lucas' writing skills, my view of Star Wars is now forever skewed by the Steve Oderkirk classic "Thumb Wars". "Touch your tongue to mine!"
All I know is this: My parents took me to see Star Wars when I was 10 in 1979, and I thought it was the greatest movie ever made. Cut to several decades later when Lucas released the "Star Wars: Special Edition" into theaters: I had not seen these movies since I was a kid, and holy crap, was I appalled at how cheesy the dialog was! "Laser brain"? "Scruffy looking Nerf Herder"? WTF?! The only saving grace of these movies is the actors themselves, who were miraculously able to deliver atrocious dialog and make it seem natural. Regardless of Lucas' writing skills, my view of Star Wars is now forever skewed by the Steve Oderkirk classic "Thumb Wars". "Touch your tongue to mine!"
Lucas Details Both STAR WARS Shows - Sep 21, 2007 - 09:39am
Am I the only one who finds the plot synopsis of the live-action Star Wars TV show completely unexciting? It's supposed to take place right at the time where the Empire comes to power, and Darth Vader is hunting down Jedi all across the galaxy--yet we won't see the Emperor, Vader, or any Jedi whatsoever. What's the point of a Star Wars show without the things that made Star Wars great? Sounds like Lucas hasn't learned a thing from the shitfest that was Ep. I, II, and III.
Am I the only one who finds the plot synopsis of the live-action Star Wars TV show completely unexciting? It's supposed to take place right at the time where the Empire comes to power, and Darth Vader is hunting down Jedi all across the galaxy--yet we won't see the Emperor, Vader, or any Jedi whatsoever. What's the point of a Star Wars show without the things that made Star Wars great? Sounds like Lucas hasn't learned a thing from the shitfest that was Ep. I, II, and III.
Gough Gives Season 7 Details of SMALLVILLE - Aug 30, 2007 - 09:36am
Wow. People still watch this show? I used to make it part of my regular watching schedule, back when this show was interesting, and seemed to be going somewhere. That all ended about season 3. The love triangle between Clark, Lana and Lex became tiresome, overplayed, and just plain lame, and the introduction of terrible Erica Durance as Lois Lane just didn't make any sense. It became clear to me that the writers and producers of this show were only interested in providing teenage boys with more whacking material than actually producing a compelling drama.
Wow. People still watch this show? I used to make it part of my regular watching schedule, back when this show was interesting, and seemed to be going somewhere. That all ended about season 3. The love triangle between Clark, Lana and Lex became tiresome, overplayed, and just plain lame, and the introduction of terrible Erica Durance as Lois Lane just didn't make any sense. It became clear to me that the writers and producers of this show were only interested in providing teenage boys with more whacking material than actually producing a compelling drama.
Scribe Paul Haggis Talks BOND 22 - Aug 27, 2007 - 10:41pm
I wouldn't compare Bond with the character of Jason Bourne, who is in almost every way the opposite of James Bond. James Bond enjoys what he does immensely, while Jason Bourne despises his abilities and what he's done with them, and will stop at nothing to make those responsible pay. Regarding Bond's treatment of women, I think that the Connery/Moore era of Bond reflected the attitudes of Hollywood at the time, where women were meant to be sex symbols or objects to be conquered by strong men--the idea of a strong, independent woman unaffected by Bond's machinations in this era was unthinkable. What surprises me are the comments from some of the men here that they still want to see the misogynistic Bond and the dimwitted, easy tramps that inhabited the world of pre-Craig Bond. Why? I know I don't find it entertaining in the least.
I wouldn't compare Bond with the character of Jason Bourne, who is in almost every way the opposite of James Bond. James Bond enjoys what he does immensely, while Jason Bourne despises his abilities and what he's done with them, and will stop at nothing to make those responsible pay. Regarding Bond's treatment of women, I think that the Connery/Moore era of Bond reflected the attitudes of Hollywood at the time, where women were meant to be sex symbols or objects to be conquered by strong men--the idea of a strong, independent woman unaffected by Bond's machinations in this era was unthinkable. What surprises me are the comments from some of the men here that they still want to see the misogynistic Bond and the dimwitted, easy tramps that inhabited the world of pre-Craig Bond. Why? I know I don't find it entertaining in the least.
Scribe Paul Haggis Talks BOND 22 - Aug 27, 2007 - 04:45pm
I guess I'm the only one who thought that the shower scene in "Casino Royale" was brilliant, and essential in establishing the character as a real human being. At this point in the movie, Daniel Craig's Bond had already been established as a misogynistic, chauvinist pig; his assumptions about Vesper at their first meeting on the train were immediately thrown back in his face, and he realized that this was not the typical all boobs, no brain bimbo, but was a strong and intelligent woman who would not be charmed or manipulated into his bed. Bond regarded her as his intellectual equal, and in doing so opened up to her in a way he would never do with any ordinary woman, which made her eventual betrayal all the more painful. Placed in this context, I don't think we'll see any more shower scenes from this Bond, either--not because he's a womanizer who was momentarily off his game, but because the pain of that betrayal will not allow him to care for anyone in that way again.
I guess I'm the only one who thought that the shower scene in "Casino Royale" was brilliant, and essential in establishing the character as a real human being. At this point in the movie, Daniel Craig's Bond had already been established as a misogynistic, chauvinist pig; his assumptions about Vesper at their first meeting on the train were immediately thrown back in his face, and he realized that this was not the typical all boobs, no brain bimbo, but was a strong and intelligent woman who would not be charmed or manipulated into his bed. Bond regarded her as his intellectual equal, and in doing so opened up to her in a way he would never do with any ordinary woman, which made her eventual betrayal all the more painful. Placed in this context, I don't think we'll see any more shower scenes from this Bond, either--not because he's a womanizer who was momentarily off his game, but because the pain of that betrayal will not allow him to care for anyone in that way again.
Scribe Paul Haggis Talks BOND 22 - Aug 27, 2007 - 09:13am
I don't know how anyone could prefer the travesty that was "Die Another Day", and the pure cheese cartoon character of Bond over that of the new very human Bond we saw in "Casino Royale". Not only is the new Bond truer to the character of Flemming's novels, he's just a more interesting character to watch. He feels pain, he gets hurt, and most importantly, he doesn't need an arsenal of ridiculous and improbable gadgets to carry out his mission. "Casino Royale" breathed new life into this franchise, and I hope they stay true to what they've done with the character, and don't get sucked back into the silly 70's-80's-90's Bond formula.
I don't know how anyone could prefer the travesty that was "Die Another Day", and the pure cheese cartoon character of Bond over that of the new very human Bond we saw in "Casino Royale". Not only is the new Bond truer to the character of Flemming's novels, he's just a more interesting character to watch. He feels pain, he gets hurt, and most importantly, he doesn't need an arsenal of ridiculous and improbable gadgets to carry out his mission. "Casino Royale" breathed new life into this franchise, and I hope they stay true to what they've done with the character, and don't get sucked back into the silly 70's-80's-90's Bond formula.
Matthew Vaughn Set to Direct THOR - Aug 10, 2007 - 01:50pm
The only way a Thor movie would not suck is if it were placed in the context of ancient Norse mythology, dealing with appropriate supernatural baddies. However, I predict that this will be a standard fish-out-of-water tale, in which the mighty Thor is somehow thrust into modern society, where ridiculous and unintentional hilarity ensues.
The only way a Thor movie would not suck is if it were placed in the context of ancient Norse mythology, dealing with appropriate supernatural baddies. However, I predict that this will be a standard fish-out-of-water tale, in which the mighty Thor is somehow thrust into modern society, where ridiculous and unintentional hilarity ensues.
Red Band 30 DAYS OF NIGHT Trailer - Aug 02, 2007 - 02:19pm
Can't seem to view it. When I click on the link, it brings up the site page but just says, "Coming Soon". Going to the main movie site fares no better--when I click to verify my age to view the trailer, I get the same message--"Coming Soon". What gives?
Can't seem to view it. When I click on the link, it brings up the site page but just says, "Coming Soon". Going to the main movie site fares no better--when I click to verify my age to view the trailer, I get the same message--"Coming Soon". What gives?
INCREDIBLE HULK Tearing Up Manhattan - Jul 23, 2007 - 12:56pm
Ponyboy76 writes: "It sounds like you don`t read many comic books because if you did, you wouldn`t make ridiculous comments about it being too cerebral." I've got a closet full of boxes filled with comics, but when I became an adult, I put away childish things. Comic books are not cerebral--if you think they are or can be, then I submit that like most fanboys, you have probably not advanced beyond the stage of thinking that the likes of Frank Miller and Alan Moore represent the pinnacle of literary culture. Perhaps you should try reading a book that doesn't literally "draw you a picture", and has more than 20 pages.
Ponyboy76 writes: "It sounds like you don`t read many comic books because if you did, you wouldn`t make ridiculous comments about it being too cerebral." I've got a closet full of boxes filled with comics, but when I became an adult, I put away childish things. Comic books are not cerebral--if you think they are or can be, then I submit that like most fanboys, you have probably not advanced beyond the stage of thinking that the likes of Frank Miller and Alan Moore represent the pinnacle of literary culture. Perhaps you should try reading a book that doesn't literally "draw you a picture", and has more than 20 pages.
INCREDIBLE HULK Tearing Up Manhattan - Jul 23, 2007 - 10:56am
Tkay42one writes, "macgawd, mind telling me what is cerebral about a HULK POODLE? " Perhaps rather than focus on the immediate effect, you should examine the overall context. Banner's father, driven insane by his own work, seeks to continue his research in the most rudimentary of conditions, and is forced to use what he has at his disposal. It's also a useful and creative juxtaposition, in order to show how Banner's work can turn a normally docile creature into a raging killer. "Hulk poodle" seems to be the sole basis of the hate for this movie, and it's a pretty silly reason to dismiss the entire film, just because you don't get it.
Tkay42one writes, "macgawd, mind telling me what is cerebral about a HULK POODLE? " Perhaps rather than focus on the immediate effect, you should examine the overall context. Banner's father, driven insane by his own work, seeks to continue his research in the most rudimentary of conditions, and is forced to use what he has at his disposal. It's also a useful and creative juxtaposition, in order to show how Banner's work can turn a normally docile creature into a raging killer. "Hulk poodle" seems to be the sole basis of the hate for this movie, and it's a pretty silly reason to dismiss the entire film, just because you don't get it.
INCREDIBLE HULK Tearing Up Manhattan - Jul 23, 2007 - 09:30am
Uh, I not only liked the first "Hulk" movie, I loved it, because it didn't lower itself to be just a "comic book movie". It seems to me that most fanboys hated it because it was too cerebral for them--too much character development and not enough "Hulk Smash!!" nonsense. Sorry, but Liv Tyler in place of Jennifer Connelly? Ed Norton in place of Eric Bana? William Hurt in place of the great Sam Elliot as Gen. "Thunderbolt" Ross? This "reboot" of the Hulk is going to suck, because its going to try and cater to the lowest common denominator that just didn't "get" the original.
Uh, I not only liked the first "Hulk" movie, I loved it, because it didn't lower itself to be just a "comic book movie". It seems to me that most fanboys hated it because it was too cerebral for them--too much character development and not enough "Hulk Smash!!" nonsense. Sorry, but Liv Tyler in place of Jennifer Connelly? Ed Norton in place of Eric Bana? William Hurt in place of the great Sam Elliot as Gen. "Thunderbolt" Ross? This "reboot" of the Hulk is going to suck, because its going to try and cater to the lowest common denominator that just didn't "get" the original.
Heroes: How to Stop an Exploding Man - May 23, 2007 - 09:25am
Overall, I didn't have a problem with the episode, until the final confrontation with Sylar. The supposed "plot holes" were insignificant, compared with the utter let down that was the battle between Peter, Hiro and Sylar. They made such a big deal about the final confrontation between Hiro and Sylar that I expected much more than what we got--a distracted Sylar being pig-stuck by Hiro. It would have been nice to see Peter and the others working together to stop Sylar, and then at the end, when things seem to be going in Sylar's favor, Hiro arrives to stop time, and kill Sylar. Oh well. Small complaint for an otherwise awesome show. BTW--I think that Hiro's father is in fact Takezo Kensei. Look at the eyes as he looks up at the eclipse in the final seconds and tell me those aren't Sulu's eyes?
Overall, I didn't have a problem with the episode, until the final confrontation with Sylar. The supposed "plot holes" were insignificant, compared with the utter let down that was the battle between Peter, Hiro and Sylar. They made such a big deal about the final confrontation between Hiro and Sylar that I expected much more than what we got--a distracted Sylar being pig-stuck by Hiro. It would have been nice to see Peter and the others working together to stop Sylar, and then at the end, when things seem to be going in Sylar's favor, Hiro arrives to stop time, and kill Sylar. Oh well. Small complaint for an otherwise awesome show. BTW--I think that Hiro's father is in fact Takezo Kensei. Look at the eyes as he looks up at the eclipse in the final seconds and tell me those aren't Sulu's eyes?
Heroes: Landslide - May 16, 2007 - 08:56am
I agree that Hiro's training seemed rather fast, but we must consider Hiro's own powers to suspend time, and that his father has an as yet unknown ability--they may very well have been training for weeks or months. As far as Hiro "cutting out his heart", I believe that this means that in order to muster the strength of will to kill Sylar, he must allow fate to sacrifice his best friend, Ando.
I agree that Hiro's training seemed rather fast, but we must consider Hiro's own powers to suspend time, and that his father has an as yet unknown ability--they may very well have been training for weeks or months. As far as Hiro "cutting out his heart", I believe that this means that in order to muster the strength of will to kill Sylar, he must allow fate to sacrifice his best friend, Ando.
HEROES: The Hard Part - May 10, 2007 - 09:08am
Gotta agree with Nax37--Sylar didn't resist Hiro's time-freezing, Hiro broke his concentration thinking about killing Sylar. Sylar may be ultra-powerful, but he does not possess any powers that are remotely close to Hiro's ability to alter space/time.
Gotta agree with Nax37--Sylar didn't resist Hiro's time-freezing, Hiro broke his concentration thinking about killing Sylar. Sylar may be ultra-powerful, but he does not possess any powers that are remotely close to Hiro's ability to alter space/time.
Heroes: Five Years Gone - May 02, 2007 - 09:19am
MIKWOZ writes: "Why did Peter have a scar if he has Claire's healing ability???" Remember way back when Peter first meets future Hiro on the subway, and Hiro comments that Peter "looks different without the scar"? My guess is that even though he has Claire's healing ability, surviving a nuclear explosion probably pushes that ability to its absolute limits, thus leaving a terrible scar. Just a guess.
MIKWOZ writes: "Why did Peter have a scar if he has Claire's healing ability???" Remember way back when Peter first meets future Hiro on the subway, and Hiro comments that Peter "looks different without the scar"? My guess is that even though he has Claire's healing ability, surviving a nuclear explosion probably pushes that ability to its absolute limits, thus leaving a terrible scar. Just a guess.
eBay Delisting Virtual Items - Jan 31, 2007 - 09:38am
"KJ's take: Oh come on. Why does Ebay have the right to decide that this property isn't as real as my old desk lamp?" Because it isn't real, KJ--hence the word 'virtual'. Get a clue. I guess if you're dumb enough to pay real money for non-existent items for a pointless game, then you get what you deserve.
"KJ's take: Oh come on. Why does Ebay have the right to decide that this property isn't as real as my old desk lamp?" Because it isn't real, KJ--hence the word 'virtual'. Get a clue. I guess if you're dumb enough to pay real money for non-existent items for a pointless game, then you get what you deserve.
eBay Delisting Virtual Items - Jan 31, 2007 - 09:25am
As far as I'm concerned, Ebay is doing you all a favor. Spending real money on 'virtual' items for a game that is a complete waste of precious time is probably the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. Ebay's motivation is likely to avoid potential lawsuits, when the geeks obsessed with WOW, EverQuest et al wake from their CRT-induced stupors to the realization that they've just spend hundreds (if not thousands) of real-world $$ for nothing. N-O-T-H-I-N-G. Idiots.
As far as I'm concerned, Ebay is doing you all a favor. Spending real money on 'virtual' items for a game that is a complete waste of precious time is probably the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. Ebay's motivation is likely to avoid potential lawsuits, when the geeks obsessed with WOW, EverQuest et al wake from their CRT-induced stupors to the realization that they've just spend hundreds (if not thousands) of real-world $$ for nothing. N-O-T-H-I-N-G. Idiots.
New APOCALYPTO trailer hits the web - Sep 14, 2006 - 09:28am
jamesdalton writes: "I forsee[sic] this film under-performing at the box office." I recall people making the same predictions for "The Passion", based on the same criticisms--subtitles, native languages, questionable historicity, etc.--they were very wrong. This film looks beautifully shot, seems to have an intriguing plot, and has definitely piqued my interest--I'd gladly fork over my $8 to see this, just for the fantastic imagery. I could care less about Mel Gibson's drunken rants--they have no bearing on my opinions of him as an actor/director.
jamesdalton writes: "I forsee[sic] this film under-performing at the box office." I recall people making the same predictions for "The Passion", based on the same criticisms--subtitles, native languages, questionable historicity, etc.--they were very wrong. This film looks beautifully shot, seems to have an intriguing plot, and has definitely piqued my interest--I'd gladly fork over my $8 to see this, just for the fantastic imagery. I could care less about Mel Gibson's drunken rants--they have no bearing on my opinions of him as an actor/director.
George Clooney in PET SEMATARY? - Aug 02, 2006 - 11:01am
I'm holding out for the remake of "Citizen Kane" as an action-comedy! Oh, you know someone in Hollywood has a script for it...
I'm holding out for the remake of "Citizen Kane" as an action-comedy! Oh, you know someone in Hollywood has a script for it...
Mania is the premiere online destination for fans of science fiction, fantasy, horror, and anime entertainment. It is the largest community offering profiles, video, science fiction movies, sci fi TV, art, sci fi comics, photos, cheats, blogs, science fiction books, forums and feedback. Mania offers insider entertainment industry info and original content for science fiction, fantasy, and horror entertainment genres including: video games, comics, gadgets, movies, television, toys, music, books, DVDs and more.
I've been trying to avoid watching too much of this viral stuff, or even the trailers--I don't want to spoil the experience, and Hollywood lately seems too fond of giving away all the suprises before the movie even opens. I can't wait to see Dark Knight! =M=