Chubbs McGee wrote:
I read one review that Abrams pretty much ripped off Spielberg, but that was okay since Spielberg was a producer on the film.
There is such a fine line between "rip-off" and "homage" but I'm pretty sure that JJ Abrams would be the first person to tell you that he crafted Super 8 to look and feel like a Spielberg movie. I had all sorts of feelings and questions about it when I came out of the movie theater smiling this summer. But maybe my biggest question was,
When was the last time that Spielberg himself made a movie this cool?
Wow. I loved the way that ended. It worked for me on so many levels.
Dashing my expectations:
Having read the first three TPBs, I really thought Shane was going to get shot at the end of this episode. The writers did a nice job of putting me on the hook because of my inside information, and then dashing those expectations against the rocks. I haven't minded that the TV show has been deviating from the Comics, and if it continues to toy with my insider knowledge then there are going to be plenty of good times to come.
And with Sofia coming out of the barn at the end - WOW. Just wow. I didn't see that coming at all. And Rick putting her down after we had heard so much about him "not having the guts to make the tough decisions" - I really thought it was masterfully constructed.
I can't wait for more this Feb., but I was really satisfied with that episode.
A*P*E - A 70's Korean ripoff of King Kong. Awesomely bad. Bad acting, ridiculous stock footage looped over and over, ridiculous scene footage looped over and over, giant ape vs. shark wrestling match, a guy in a bad ape suit flipping off the camera and Joanna Kerns, the mom from Growing Pains.
Hard Rock Zombies - Horrible early 80's hair metal band discovers bass riff that can bring the dead back to life. After they are killed by ultra-conservative small-towners in the midwest, a groupie resurrects them with a cassette tape recording of the riff so that they may wreak hair metal vengeance. This movies also has: midgets, werewolves, and Hitler.
The Stuff - This certainly has the biggest budget of any of the movies I've mentioned but it is a true turkey nonetheless. Word to the wise; should you ever discover something that looks like marshmallow fluff bubbling from the ground like crude oil, do not - repeat - DO NOT stick your finger into the stuff and take a taste. It is a quasi-sentient mass that will control your mind and use your talents to create a new line of snack products bent on world domination.
Terrorvision - "Grandpa, are we playing sneak attack again?"
The Call of Duty series and Battlefield series get a lot of players. I have played Call of Duty World at War online and it is fun especially if you have a lot of friends to mess around with in private sessions. The only problem that I found was that some people are sooo freaking good it can seem impossible. When it comes to those games I am a perennial noob.
I like Red Dead Redemption's multiplayer function. Its from a third person perspective in Rockstar Game's fashion, but it has a lot of variety in games. You can free roam with a few friends and take out bandit hideouts or you can play a variety of scenarios that they provide for you. On top of that it is a really great single player game.
Rumor is that the new Batman: Arkham City game will also have a multiplayer function with one player controlling Batman and the other controlling Catwoman.
I have a friend who swears by DC Universe Online but its a subscription service and I haven't played it at all.
I hope you are right. But the music and the editing and (let's face it) Peter's Twilighty haircut steeped that trailer in "my life is full of pain, noone understands me, my soul is the color of anguish"
But I sincerely hope you connected those dots correctly. I love Spider-Man and want this movie to be good.
Anyway, back on the Captain America train
I loved seeing the Howling Commandos! And kudos to Jack Kirby for including an African American soldier in their ranks before actual integration within the armed forces. And this was back when comics were "kids stuff"
No movie this year had the potential to disappoint me like Captain America, but thankfully I came out of the theater relieved and energized. I really enjoyed it. My biggest concern was that Chris Evans was going to bring his usual manboy-douchebaggery act to the movie, but he played it straight and really fit in well with the 40's aesthetic. He does well - as did Hugo Weaving as the Red Skull. But did anyone else think Hugo sounded a little like Arnold Schwarzeneggar?
I hope you are right. I hope it is good. But that preview rankled me with its Twilighty Teen-Angst. Peter Parker was a nerd, a bookworm, and an outcast, but he was not a "wear my hoody up and sit in the corner furiously writing bad poetry" kind of kid. Not everyone who has pain in their life sinks into the abyss of emo.
I really dig the Inception Soundtrack. For the most part I like all of Hans Zimmer's Soundtracks and I was really hoping he would win the Oscar this year.
Then a friend of mine showed me this hidden sampling.
My friend thought it was borderline plagiarism and that Hans and co. shouldn't win the Oscar. I thought it was a brilliant use of sampling and it made me even more hopeful he'd win.
What do you think?
I thought this was a great movie and I'm glad to see that Christian Bale won the best supporting actor Oscar. He was tremendous in this film. I probably would've given best supporting actress to the girl in True Grit but there is no doubt that Melissa Leo, who plays Mickey and Dickey's mother, is fantastic as well.
If you missed this one in the theater do yourself a favor and check it out once it hits DVD.
a bunch of critics said. . . the film isn't anything more than a re-shoot.
I honestly didn't think this was true. Yes. Its a remake. And Yes. A lot of scenes are very similar.
But I think the American version has enough differences to make it worthwhile viewing, whether you've seen the original or not.
Some differences that instantly spring to mind:
The beginning of the movie.
The attempted murder of the boy taking place in the car instead of in the gym locker room.
The lack of that crazy scene with the cats (which I quite liked in the original).
Do the kids go down into the teenager's basement/clubhouse in the original? I can't remember but I don't think so.
*The way they handled the girl's androgynous nature.
*The relationship between the girl and her middle aged protector.
And in response to a later post from Wolfthulhu, most of the time American remakes of horror movies do lack the subtle touches that made the original movie so good. We are not a subtle culture. But I thought that Let Me In actually handled the last two differences I listed better than the Swedish version. I never really got the idea that the girl wasn't a girl in the Swedish version and I thought her relationship with the older man had a little higher stakes in the remake.
Its a remake. But it is handled well and has enough differences to make it well worth viewing.
Andrew Turner wrote:
Let Me In is the first Hollywood remake I've ever seen to get it totally right!
I agree. Both versions are terrific. A brilliant exception to the rule of "crappy remakes for foreign movies".
What I think is even more impressive is that the American remake is much different than the Swedish film. It didn't copy the original and still managed to stay true to all of the same themes.
I guess its a testament to the strength of the book. I didn't read it but my wife says its very good.
This movie is beautiful, disturbing, and at times, downright frightening. I would highly recommend it to anyone who enjoys "non traditional" storytelling in films. I gotta give props to the director (Darren Aronofsky) who isn't afraid to challenge his audience. In these days of big budget tripe that spells everything out for the public, he made a successful movie that leaves plenty of questions in the mind of the audience.
It stayed with me long after I left the theater.
These days the Academy Awards are nominating 10 movies for best picture and I'm sure Black Swan will be among them.
But I think it would easily make the top 5, maybe even the top 3.
This movie is terrific. Well acted by a great ensemble, beautifully shot, well paced. I enjoyed it thoroughly.
Jeff Bridges and the young lady are sure to get Oscar nods and I have to give it to Barry Pepper for acting through some of the ugliest prosthetic teeth I have ever seen.
You should see it.
I start with a basic adventure idea.
I draw a map of where the action will take place. I've always loved drawing maps and I find that sketching it out helps me visualize and create the finer details of the story.
I write notes for myself, and if I feel its necessary, a few blocks of text to read to the PCs. This is just as much for me as it is for them because I have often found myself forgetting important details. Including them in a block text guarantees I wont forget to pass it on.
I write out all necessary stat block info on a "combat sheet". Just the details that would be relevant in the combat or other interaction. I also use removable sticky bookmarks and tab the creature's pages in my Monster Manual.
I prepare any handouts that my players will receive. These might be letters, player maps, or an in game puzzle that the PCs need to solve. Giving them something physical helps immensely.
I select two or three pieces of music, and load the CD player. I'll put one on repeat for the passive roleplaying and click over to repeat the other track for combat.
If I have the time, I transfer my map onto a large pad of grid paper before the session. This saves time in the game and the map looks nicer for my PCs.
I stock the fridge with beer.
I once said that the DM's job is keeping the PC's alive while all the time convincing them he's out to get them.
That's beautiful. That probably top 5 in my DM Advice Bag.
My games are pretty immersive role playing experiences. I enjoy playing out as many roleplaying situations as possible from beggars to kings. I use the third person sparingly, and only if I feel pressed for time. I wish I used "cut-scenes" more because my PCs always respond well to them. I enjoy the character interaction more than the combat. Maybe its because running combat is one of my weaker DM traits. I prepare a lot ahead of time to try and keep combat running as smooth as possible.
I'd love to say I don't railroad my players, but in reality I think I kind of do. I don't think my players realize they are being railroaded because I am always willing to play ball with them, but the truth is, they are going to move through the encounters I have written. They decide the "wheres" and "whens" but make no mistake, I am going to keep them moving down the line.
I'm the engine on the train. I am always headed for the final destination. The PCs may spend their time in a variety of different train cars. They may even get off at other stops and stretch their legs for awhile. But the trains destination is pretty much set. Unless there is a derailment. Then we take care of the dead, clean up a bit, and find a new route.
Freehold DM wrote:
I don't know. There are plenty of really compelling TV dramas that don't have much action in them. There is plenty of conflict within the story already, and watching people survive in an apocalyptic setting only heightens this. As long as the writing is good I'm fine without having to see the group get overrun by zombies every episode.
Now don't get me wrong, I do like it when the brains hit the fan, but in the end its going to be the people, not the zombies, that keep me watching.
Freehold DM wrote:
totally. I also am excited to see what different directions they might take it.
However, getting to the CDC seemed like a pretty momentous step for the group. I would've actually preferred to see them do a bit more of the day to day survival scenarios acted out in the first couple of books. I feel like the producers felt (and rightly so) like they needed "something big" at the end of the first season so they amped it up with CDC scenario.
I'm still excited to see where it goes. . .
I agree that they dropped the ball in ordering only 6 episodes, but thats not my main gripe.
As for "most shows working that way" I don't think that The Walking Dead is going to work like "most shows".
Most shows, if they are picked up, are ready to shoot pretty quickly and release new episodes in less than a year. But most shows don't have the technical sophistication that TWD does. TWD is makeup effects heavy (which will slow its shooting schedule) and on top of that they don't even have scripts written for 75% percent of the new episodes.
Also, I don't know what seasons are like in Georgia(where they film) but they may want to hold off until they are in the same season for continuity's sake. The camp scenes require a lot of outdoor shooting. Then they have to edit. . .
Unless they put pedal to metal, I think it may be more than a year before we see the new episodes.
does anyone else think this show would be way cooler if they skipped all the lame back at camp parts and focused solely on the i'm in atlanta kickin ass parts? and i also think this series would have been better if it followed daryl and merl instead of rick, i don't so much as dislike the character of rick as much as i dislike the actor who plays him
I like the parts at camp. Despite whatever differences there may be between the comic and tv show, I think the tv show is handling the spirit of thing correctly. Its more about the breakdown of society than jump-out-atcha zombie action.
This show is good. Its too bad that AMC dropped the ball in reordering 13 new episodes. It is going to be a long time a-comin after the original 6 air that we are going to see new episodes. The diehards like us are going to watch it but,
IS ANYONE ELSE GOING TO REMEMBER THIS SHOW BY THE TIME NEW EPISODES RE-AIR?
I hope so, because it is good television.
James Keegan wrote:
My ladyfriend dumped me in July. It wasn't horrible or drawn out or anything and I was doing fine, but she wants to get back together now and I'm a bit hesitant to say the least.
For what its worth. . .
Don't do it dude. At the very least don't rush back into it. Repeat relationships are almost never a good idea.
Be "friends" with her if you can. A lot of relationships end with the "lets just be friends" nonsense, but if she wants to get back in a romantic relationship, she should at least be able to compromise at a platonic level first. Take it slow. Go out in groups, don't feel the need to always sit next to each other, etc. She might give you crap at first for not making her the "most important person in the room", but you'll have plenty of time to do that if you are going to get "serious" again.
Sorry to blast my opinion at you James, but I've always respected you on these boards and I am dead set against making the same mistake twice when it comes to relationships.
I love this band. I just got my hand on Warp Riders and I haven't stopped listening to it yet. I didn't hit me as hard as Gods of the Earth when I first heard it, but I am really digging it more each time I listen.
This band gets a lot of crap for not being pure metal, but how can people on these boards not dig 'em? Its Dungeons & Dragons infused stoner metal! They have songs about Conan and George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire! Their new album cover looks like the cover of an old pulp sci-fi novel!
+1. At times a bit too Libertarian for me, but I can still cotton to most of it. And its funny. How many books from the Law section of the Library can make you laugh out loud?
Tao te Ching by Lao Tzu, The Steven Mitchell translation.
Meditations by Marcus Aureilus.
The Old Man and the Sea by Hemingway.
Trilogy, eh? Hopefully it's the first three books, with the diminishing returns of the rest of the series ignored.
Book 4 was actually my favorite but I think it could be cut out of the story without too much trouble.
It would make a great one season TV series though.