The movie was pretty as hell, and had some very satisfying gruesome moments, this I can't deny. But damn, I left the theater with a hollow feelling of "been there, done that". As much as I criticize Prometheus at least that film didn't make me feel like that. I need to rewatch it to make a better judgment, but I think Prometheus even with all its lows is a better movie.
Also, two things:
I have no idea why David is doing all this weird freaky shit.
And, holy crap, the characters in the movie were DUMB.
So more rumors of the problems with the Star Trek Discovery show newest that its going to be facing some stiff competition form The Orville which looks to be playing the role of a Star Trek series better than Discovery.
Just saw Pirates 5. Not as shit as i thought it was gonna be. I kinda want to get it and 4 to put on my shelf now. I will keep my expectations low for Pirates 6 if that ever becomes a thing, and knowing current trends I it wouldn't surprise me.
>>48042 First, pretty much all reviews seem to agree that this movie is actually the most character-oriented of the trilogy, and plenty mention that the apes working with the humans are there for a good plot reason. Apparently, they were Koba's followers who resent Caesar's rule, and voluntarily switched sides.
Second, Dawn was an excellent film. If you don't recall anything from it, it's clear you don't have an interest in the ongoing plot of the trilogy, so I am not sure why are we having this argument in the first place.
Man, you know what people who love The Mist HATE? Monsters, it's so great that this series understands no one wants to see any monsters. Yup everyone is here for forgettable character drama complete with amnesia storylines. Soap opera drama with no monsters, THAT'S what The Mist should be!
CBS wants those digital bucks like all the others. But I really don't see the reason to pay months for the show and I doubt many others will either. Also rest of the world gets it on Netflix who knowing the Netflix releases they'll get all the episodes at once and it'll be spoiled right quick.
Not that it matters. Main Character is pretty much adopted by Sarek and is the most important person in the universe. Its the level of character writing I'm dreading will infect the New Doctor.
According to Midnight's Edge part of the fanbase has some to the same reasoning. In part because Seth MacFarlane seems to get the Roddenberry vision of the future more than this Kelvin offshoot series (as the video states all the prime timeline talk is just for show and the actual production will have nothing to do with TOS era stuff as its known)
No usage of god even in swearing. Though it seems that taking all faith out of the Federation is gonna seem rather odd when put against a group of Klingon who are very devout in faith. That's gonna be some uncomfortable parallels in its own right. The high minded federation that long ago "abandoned mysticism" vs the super religious Klingon.
Yea that's not gonna come off as heavy handed.
Also makes humanity the odd race out since pretty much everyone even Vulcan's still have some connection to deities.
Also since they have so much riding on retaining the license as the video title says they have another series in the back pocket if needed and that will go up on CW if Discovery fails (since CBS Direct will go with it, as I've thought was the case from the start)
>>48121 Okay you've got so much twisted there that I am shocked.
So lets try and breakdown all the ways in which you got it wrong.
A) You are talking about the Giggler who was based on a real serial killer.
B) The Giggler was a Latino man in the film.
C) He worked at the behest of Fraker who was a white man.
D) Kersey doesn't kill him for stealing his groceries, he kills him because he was the main thug enforcer who terrorized the neighborhood and killed at least two people, one being Charlie and the other an unnamed girl whose head rammed a switchblade into.
E) The "groceries" were a two hundred dollar camera in 1985 which Kersey used as a lure to get a clean shot as the Giggler was incredibly fast.
F) The people who cheered were predominately mixed in race with the woman who screamed out cheers and adulation being a black women so happy she didn't have to live in fear of him having been previously victimized.
G) Go fuck yourself for not even getting basic details of the film right, Death Wish 3 is dumb as fuck but it's not racist and doesn't need your bullshit misrepresentation comparing to this Eli Roth fucking sludge.
Is it really so fucking hard to watch a youtube clip?
Also: Kersey was Asian-American himself, and his killings were not limited to people of one specific ethnicity. One could argue that he was working as an agent of a White power structure (the NYPD), but that would still ignore how his killings targeted people of multiple ethnicities, including the White leader of the gang terrorizing the neighborhood in which Kersey set up shop.
>There are four moves a streaming consumer might make once Disney’s service launches. In all four, consumer utility per dollar goes down. If consumers pay for two services, even one dollar more per month, that increases the price for the same amount of content. If they just subscribe to Disney, the consumer will get less content per dollar for that subscription, so the marginal price goes up even if the out-of-pocket cost decreases. If they just do Netflix, they get less content per dollar for the old price (and lose a premium provider), so the value of their Netflix subscription drops, though the out-of-pocket price doesn’t change. If they don’t do either, they’ll have more money in their pocket but lose the benefits (what economists call “utility”) of a streaming subscription, so they lose life enjoyment (which is its own kind of price). It’s lose-lose-lose-lose.
Though with Netflix I can see them expanding their field to create more content to fill the gaps.
Disney I don't see CREATING content for the digital platform as much as just having a place to PUT things. And as we've seen with Makers their age group they want to go after seems to be at odds with image projection. Flatly we won't see Punisher on the same service as Mickey Mouse. And that not even going into the "vault" and keeping some content away.
The biggest issue here lies in just how far Disney—and CBS, and every other major broadcast and cable network—thinks people will go to keep up with all this content. Netflix was considered a huge value because, hey, hundreds of movies at your fingertips and no ads or censorship or physical media to worry about. (Side note: If you want guaranteed access to the media that matters most to you, buying your own content is the way to go. I still pick up the occasional Blu-ray.) That Netflix has original programming now is a bonus, just as it is for Hulu or Amazon Prime Video.
Disney could have made their service look much more alluring by keeping Disney content on Netflix. Families who occasionally watch Disney movies on Netflix can keep doing so, while families who use Netflix almost exclusively for Disney-style content could conceivably switch over to the Disney service and lose nothing of value. But Disney decided to make people explicitly choose between Netflix and Disney, and that is not going to end well for anyone in the long run.
CBS according to Midnights Edge and their industry sources has it all riding on Star Trek Discovery. A few executives don't like the expense of the show combined with no chance for advertising revenue.
That combined with Netflix putting a lot of money into the production and getting cut out of the largest market which has lead to rumors of possible legal action. If Star Trek Discovery isn't a hit from the start the CBS is said to be looking to scrap the whole project both Discovery as a larger show with a ending they filmed showing it to be a one off series anthology and the next series going on CW who happens to have a distribution deal with Netflix.
I can see Disney thinking they can do this with little problems as they are old hands at the premium channel concept. But they were at the forefront of things back then and a good square of their content is almost interchangeable with content from Nickelodeon who also have a sizable number of premium channels but have fallen out of favor with providers services for pretty much the same reason. They think they are the reason people want such services and greatly overvalued themselves which has crippled the Viacom viewership numbers across the board.
Because when it came down to doing without or paying inflated prices for content. People decided to just do without.
Disney is one of only a handful of major media conglomerates that could pull off a “company-only” streaming service and make it work beyond the success of a single show or movie. It has an established brand, nearly a century’s worth of content, and the money to make it happen. I could actually believe that families would buy into “DisneyFlix” based on the notion that it is a “family-friendly” service. But that still does not change how “DisneyFlix” would ultimately be a bad move for both Disney and consumers.
>>48141 Its the "family-friendly" thing that would really cramp it. Also I could see it being similar to how HBO Direct is treated. Sign up watch the show that you want and then unsubscribe. Reason HBO is putting out year round content like Sesame Street to keep parents on the app even after GoT or West World is over.
>>48141 >It has an established brand, nearly a century’s worth of content, and the money to make it happen.
Plus, between Star Wars, the Marvel movies, their live action remakes, and the recent string of highly successful in-house CGI movies, Disney has been obliterating the competion at the theaters for a while. That probably makes the execs confident enought that they can do the same in the streaming business.
That still gets into whether people will see enough value in subscribing to Disney’s service just for Marvel/“Star Wars” content. I can fathom a few megafans doing that, sure, but not enough to make it worth Disney’s while.
>>48147 I swear that was kinda they backed down on the Netflix takeover. Just not enough content to fill it out. But then that's the same problem they have going it at alone with a smaller distribution idea. Not enough content to be viable.
Its why CBS will fail and NBC/Universal back down from the plans after they acquired Dreamworks. Not enough content to be a viable revenue stream. Netflix was able to swing it because the streaming started off as a kinda bonus to their mail service. And so they were well settled with a subscriber base before they kicked into gear.
But starting from gear one with nothing. Its why they've given themselves till 2019. See how it pans out for the others.
Disney has enough content to be viable, especially if they put their entire film and television library online without the “vault” bullshit. But content alone will not save this venture if customers decide that they’d rather not pay another ten dollars per month just for Disney/Marvel/“Star Wars” content.
>>48149 The Vault will be a sticking point. They've built decades of using their Vault Cycle to boost revenue with scarcity. Someone is bound to choke when contemplating ending that nonsense.
Another note some of that content in HD and Blueray when it comes to their older movies is utter shit. Sword in the Stone being one of the worst remasters.
IF and its a HUGE "IF" that if they actually go back and put new versions from the original prints remasters as part of the service instead of those failures than maybe they'll have something worth looking into.
The kind of people who would be placated by that kind of move would probably just wait for a new Blu-ray/4K release. While I could appreciate actual remasters going up on the service, I do not see that as a legitimate “selling point” for the average person.
I think one of the other things was Netflix being "in debt" which made Disney pull back. Though listening to Midnight's Edge followup on the Star Trek stuff which they reveal the new proposed show if Discovery falls is a Khan centered show. They also note that while Netflix has a lot of bills to pay they are also good money and always pay up.
So what the Hollywood Media touts as a "problem" isn't one really.
Wouldn't doubt it. Lot of Hollywood don't like Netflix being Netflix. Even though about a decade ago they were looking into streaming movies as an alternative to theater releases since revenue was down before that new wave of blockbusters.
Watched my first TISM concert (a recording; they essentially retired a decade ago) and it's everything I expected, just chaotic. An iconic part of the band is their use of bandanas (as well as other extravagant costumes) to conceal their identities at least two turned out to be high-school music teachers. However a couple of the band members just dive into the crowd and emerge in only underwear, with stage crew members dragging them back toward the stage and putting new bandanas on them (I think one random audience member just threw their own bandana onto the stage for the band members to use). It's almost like watching a piranha horror movie except with rock music and drunk yobbos. Half the footage from the 43 minute mark onward is damage control from the stage crew.
webm related: I believe the white-shirt who runs on stage is stage crew, TISM singer bloody drags him off the stage into the crowd
>>48168 Ok, 20 minutes left and one (the singer) has already emerged from the crowd completely naked, and I'm guessing that he just tied a ripped shirt into a makeshift loin-cloth. The music is still going without issue though.
Well, it’s not the worst idea in the world. xHamster gets lots of visitors; has the infrastructure in place to handle demand; and hosts content that would never air on broadcast, cable, or even premium cable networks. The only differences between them and Netflix are how Netflix doesn’t host porn and how xHamster gives a damn about Sense8.
>finally watched Firefly >about to watch Serenity >decide to see the trailer first >do so >quickly realize the movie might be a shortened AU version of the show (in other words, reboot) >feel awful >check Wikipedia >says the film is really a sequel Heart skipped a beat there.
Okay, watched Serenity. Could not have imagined it is possible to satisfyingly, and believably, conclude a cancelled TV show of high concept with a 2 hour movie, but by Jove Joss done it. Pretty much all major plot threads tied. The most important mysteries explained.
I have no complaints. Which is more than I can say about Samurai Jack season 5.
Saw the Orville. Not bad had a lot of notes that felt like early TNG. Its got a base and now its just finding itself. If its allowed to continue past the first season I thing it could be something people have been looking for a long time.
Was actually pretty decent, but damn, Pennywise is actually the least scary thing in the film. I didn't find Curry's Pennywise scary either, but at least he was fun to watch. The new Pennywise is played so ridiculously over the top, it was just silly. Plenty of good scares in the movie but none of them involve the clown, and worse, some are actually kinda ruined when he appears.
>>48243 Halloween 2 is decent but if they decide to ignore it, it's not a dealbreaker for me. Who knows, perhaps the new writer asked Carpenter how he'd do it if he actually cared for the sequel (instead of, you know, hastily writing "they are siblings" late at night to be done with it), and they came up with a cool new twist.
Hope The Orville rebuilds some of its steam. Apparently the sudden change from Sunday to Thursday caused a drop. For me in part because I expected it to be NEXT Thursday to be the new air time not the Thursday after airing on Sunday. But its Fox the king od shit Episodes seem solid though "About a girl" seems to be making people twitchy.
Though in all its not that different a discussion than what has appeared in Star Trek shows before. Questions about species/race/gender and conformity.
This is still a great Star Trek show and folks that wanted this to be Family Guy in space. Well I feel bad for them. For having such horrendous taste.
To be honest, I feel a bit twitchy about it as well, fully aware that this is hardly a new direction for Star Trek. I think it just comes down to the fact that it was a bit more transparent on its issues and today's ideological climate makes it a more touchy subject given, not the subject, but the sort of individuals that would get involved in the debatethese days.
It was still a decent episode, but it really still is a bit early to try to make statements as weighty as that episode wanted to.
>watch one of the first gaming stream I've ever seen >person has taken half an hour, and is still going, on a pretty simple level I wish I could just grab the controller from his country and win the level for him.
>watch part of sci-fi film (Elysium) >programmer has code on screen >it's actual Assembly code, compiles showing warning and error count, the whole h4xX0r stuff is passable Holy shit. Like, you know when they have a blackboard full of maths? Now I know how a mathematician feels when they put a proper formula and not just pythag, quadratic formula or mass-energy equivalence. Or how a guitarist feels when they play real tabs instead of just strumming.
I need to rewatch the new Blade Runner. I might like it better than the original. I do find it interesting how a prevalent theme in sequels to older franchises have a father/offspring dynamic in a bunch of them.
As for MacFarlane and those who made jokes about Weinstein years ago: It is possible that they heard rumors and such without knowing what Weinstein had done. That said, even they should have spoken up a hell of a lot earlier or spoken a hell of a lot louder than an off-color joke.
>>48296 Problem is and has been the same problem for decades. You may be an actor but they are the executives with the lawyers that will destroy you or in some as its coming out take you down with them as part of the whole seedy business. And then we've got the quotes for the likes of those that make their living interviewing like Barbra Walters who didn't want to go down that path because it would bring all of Hollywood down to know what some of their A-list talent does to the less known.
For those that are especially young like Cory Haim and his abusers and Singer and his whole cadre. They get fed the stories of "I'll make you a star" and "Its just the way things work." Or just beat you down enough where life isn't life anymore.
As for Seth word is his Co-star on Ted confided in him and that his barbs came from a very angry place.
Another of Hollywood's vile open secrets that none of them wanted to get out there.
>>48297 We went through a similar experience when Jimmy Saville's crimes came to light after he died. There was a sense that him being a creepy old sod was an open secret in many corners of the British entertainment industry (quiz shows would make jokes about it) but nobody dared voice them out loud while he was still alive. He was a major philanthropist and a "national treasure," which made him virtually untouchable.
Weinstein probably went down like he did because he was no such “national treasure”. He was powerful, yes, but he was not a creator—actor, director, playwright, what have you. We have proof of Polanski’s skill as a director, so we as a society overlook his indiscretion (read: his statutory rape of an underage girl and subsequent conviction for that crime). We have nothing to give us a similar connection with Weinstein; he fell faster and harder because he lacked that cultural “buffer”.
>>48297 >You may be an actor but they are the executives with the lawyers that will destroy you Maybe I just don't get it, but if you have proof, or you and a bunch of other people collectively testify that they got sexually abused, I don't think their lawyers can do shit to destroy your career, so long as you are fine working for other companies from then on.
>>48306 Definitely. People appreciate creators more than (I think these are the right words) managers and bureaucrats. I think people will more readily see a bureaucrat as abusing their power than an artist. Of course that probably isn't the case, but I think there's more of a cultural acceptance that a boss can use his (or their, kinda maybe) position to sexually exploit their employees. On the other hand, an artist will have fans, so it's easier to believe the act is acceptable for the victim.
Also, his response to the accusation basically being "sorry I don't remember being a pedophilic pervert to you, was too drunk, also BTW i am gay"... yesssl, blatantly using the gay community as a shield, what an asshole.
By making that statement, he not only made this situation all about himself, he enabled every anti-queer asshole who conflates homosexuality with pedophilia to point at him and yell “I was right”. The media will help him with that, too—because they are bound to make this story more about “Spacey came out” than about “Spacey allegedly sexually assaulted a 14-year-old”.
>>48317 Yeah, that response was meticulously worded to minimize the "14 year old" part and just make it a gay thing, I doubt Spacey himself wrote any of it, it's the product of a team of lawyers and advisors.
>>48316 >>48318 >Yeah, that response was meticulously worded to minimize the "14 year old" part and just make it a gay thing, I doubt Spacey himself wrote any of it, it's the product of a team of lawyers and advisors. Absolutely. I just read it, and it's exactly how one might accept them to handle it. >apologise but say it wasn't your fault and might have never happened anyway >divert attention with BREAKING GOSSIP I'M HOMOSEXUAL How about instead of coming out as gay, come out as a hebephile.
Also an issue: He framed his coming out as “choosing” to live as a gay man, thus also emboldening all the assholes who think sexual orientation can be “chosen”. He threw every other gay person under the bus for his own sake. But at least he cannot enjoy that “win”—House of Cards got shitcanned by Netflix.
This current wave of accusations is bittersweet (although I thoroughly support it): unfortunately I believe it may encourage false accusations, which if found will injure the cases of actual victims (hell, someone might be smart enough to fake a false accusation to discredit their victims), and if more accusations come out, it will make a lot of people disappointed in Hollywood persons we respected.
>>48320 Yes, a few mainstream news outlets seem to be emphasising that, which is good to see.
>>48322 >someone might be smart enough to fake a false accusation to discredit their victims That doesn't seem likely. A baseless accusation would be passed over by every news media with anything resembling credibility (or concern with lawsuits), languishing so far in obscurity that the faker bringing it up would be suspicious. Setting up false evidence/witnesses that could later be disproved would be absurdly impractical.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, the Dark Universe—an attempt by Universal Pictures to create a shared cinematic universe out of films featuring all the classic horror film monsters—has been shelved. Blame most likely goes to the dismal performance of “The Mummy”, which was the second of the Dark Universe films. (I say “second” because Universal tried to kickstart their shared universe before with “Dracula Untold”.)
In fairness, the base idea of the Dark Universe—a bunch of horror/action films with connective narrative tissue working up to what would essentially be “Monster Squad for adults”—could have worked. Universal needed to make good movies for it first, though.
>>48364 Louis CK show was super honest to his life, one of the episodes is literally about him trying to rape a close friend of his. He's always been honest about being fucking wretched and his struggles to deal with it....
I think he's going to be the person this comes down to, what to we really do with flawed people? Not the ultra power and evil, but the flawed and mistaking humans who fucked up super hard? Jail time? Sure but that's not making them any less flawed, only more toxic.
>what to we really do with flawed people? Not the ultra power and evil, but the flawed and mistaking humans who fucked up super hard?
We treat them as we would the “evil”. We should not make exceptions for “flawed“ people if they are of sound mind and know the difference between right and wrong—both of which apply to Louis C.K. His honesty does not, nor should it, make his actions any less reprehensible. To wit:
I have not yet read about the allegations of his behavior, but if they seem credible—and remember, the court of public opinion has a much lower standard than a court of law—his acting and activist careers should both come to an end.
>>48370 No, but I don't think that's a fair comparison. That would be a hypocritical (assuming you meant pro-consent) cause since his crime was due to a lack of consent.
If Louis C.K. campaigned for gay rights and anti-xenophobia I would take him as seriously as any other celebrity who did it. People who do bad things can also do good things. It doesn't make up for the bad things, but it also doesn't invalidate their good deeds. Invalidating a person's charitable actions by one aspect of their personality isn't something I can support.
If a Nazi acts like a good Samaritan to a random stranger, that should not be rejected just because they are an ultranationalist. It's easy to treat life like a Hollywood film or comic with "good guys" and "bad guys", but it's not really like that.
Choi Eun-hee died. She was a South Korean actress who along with her (at the time) ex-husband was kidnapped by North Korea to make films for Kim Jong-il in the 80s. It's a wild story, not just because it seriously sounds like a meta-film plot itself.
>>417291 That does not surprise me at the least. A few years back someone even ported Prince of Persia to the C64, extremely faithfully too.
However as far as C64 demos go, I don't think anything will ever top Edge of Disgrace for me. Hard to believe it turned 10 years old this year. Booze Design - Edge of Disgrace | C64 demo, Full HD 50 fps, Real SID It's not just the effects themselves which are impressive... well, you hardly see new effects on the C64 nowadays, and once you saw the plasma effect or the text scroller for the tenth time it becomes boring. But, here, everything is animated in a way so there are transitions. Most demos just show one effect, then switch to the next, etc. On Edge of Disgrace, you have small effects dedicated to the transition between each effect.
I mean it's such a subtle little detail, but it's impressive as shit.
>>417322 Terrible music choice, nothing wrong about the Sonic design. See, the thing with Sonic, the original one is..... not good looking. You can only do so much without changing too much. Fucking monoeye, man.......
Watched this one today, because the title reminded me of one of my favourite Iron Maiden songs. Turns out, the song was actually based on this movie.
It's a great flick, although a bit basic. It only goes in one direction, no plot twists or anything (other than revealing some facts about the main character which are already obvious by that point). I expected the ending a little bit, but that's only because I like the idea of characters getting redemptions, even if it's not much of a one and perhaps more like he was trying to keep himself out of jail.
Watching the TV Series they made out of The Boys. The way he's dressed up, I always mistake Karl Urban for Brad Pitt with a hair dye. I'm only up to the first ep, the story has a lot of changes, and makes some of the characters reasonings a bit different. Like, in the comic, Hughie was an emotional wreck who just wanted his girlfriend to be alive again, and Butcher actively coached him into the job, even if it was only revealed years later that he was doing so. The TV series makes doesn't really give the same emotion to Hughie in this regard. They do not downplay the hedonism of the heroes though, but they don't show so much probably to keep the ratings down (the scene with Annie isn't that hardcore, I mean, they don't have three guys in there...). Homelander is presented a bit different too.
It's a shame that Hughie and Butcher don't look closer to their comic versions, but they did give a shout-out to him being a likeness of Simon Pegg, by making Pegg have a cameo as Hughie's dad (and yeah, he isn't the same character as in the comic).
Well, the spirit of the series is still there, even if the setting is a bit different. I'm gonna watch the rest, let's hope it's okay. I hate how they always have to change shit around for TV or Movie, even when a series would work as-is in that setting. With that kept in mind, it's not bad, as far as the first ep I watched so far.
>>417350 Also, props to whoever picked the music. Great selections so far. Clash, Iggy Pop... good shit. Playing "London Calling" when Butcher goes medieval is probably a nod to his London origins in the comic too.
Oh! and he speaks just like in the comic. Same argot and all. That one brightened up my day, cause I really liked how he talked.
>>417351 >>417350 After watching the rest of the season, I'm highly disappointed. Too many characters and storylines were cut, while the ones that stayed have dramatically different timing. Except for Starlight, nearly every characters is worse in the TV series than in the comics. The violence and gore is severly toned down, after the first two or so episodes there's few mentions of the supes deviances either.
The Boys team itself comes off as a bunch of nobodies without a reason to go along with this beyond owing something to Butcher. Butcher himself is just an asshole, not the manipulative bastard. Hughie is practically carrying the team on his own. The rest of the team are practically ineffective, and they don't even have company backing because Butcher is an impatient asshole. They are just a couple of rogues. Frenchie and Female are alright, although Frenchie is less insane and Female is much less inhuman. Mothers Milk is a random nigga with a normal wife and a normal daughter.
For the supes, The Deep and A-Team are totally different and Deep in particular is so much worse. Jack from Jupiter is replaced with a different martian manhunter expy, a guy who can turn invincible as well as invisible (favourite occupation: jerking it off in womens bathrooms). Stillwell is just some random company chick, not the Ultimate CEO from the comics. Homelander is great though, steals the show whenever he appears. Maeve is okay, but nowhere near the broken mess she was in the comics.
Moreover, while the comic slowly steps up the game by going after smaller supes first, and then building it up to the more dangerous teams, the TV series goes after the Seven immediately. Butchers reasoning is particularly weaker, in the comic something truly horrible happened to him, in the TV series he basically got cucked by Homelander and that's all.
There's no Terror, Legend, Love Sausage. Terror has a half second cameo in a flashback. On the upside, they managed to bring over a lot of the mannerisms for the characters they didn't change.
Also, they name dropped the artists of the book, Robertson and McCrea, as two senators. Had to rewind that part to make sure I heard it right, haha.
A new Matrix will feel odd with Reeves and Moss but no Fishburne, especially considering that Morpheus is the one who was alive at the end of the story. Of course, there is that rumor that Morpheus is in the movie but will be played by a younger actor, and I have no idea what the hell is going on any more.
>>417354 >directed by the Wachowski sisters Only Lana is directing, Lily is busy with another project.
>>417353 Well to be fair, when you take a step back, modern superheroes are pretty ridiculous in concept and much more so in execution. It becames doubly ridiculous when people try writing them "seriously" or when you have the 90s grimdark bullshit. About the only exemptions are the classic pulp heroes, and Superman (and he is an exemption not because of his superpowers but because he is a genuinely good person).
The real parody in The Boys aren't the superheroes though, but the media machine behind them. That's what the series satirizes: the comic book industry itself, not the superheroes. But this is lost on most people because they just think it's all edgy bullshit drivel. Like the annual company-wide crossovers being just an excuse to have an orgy.
Of course you can just watch it as "lol superheroes r bad" and you'll get your fill of satisfaction, but there was an actual narrative beyond all of that.
>>417353 >who has a hateboner for all heroes except Superman. I don't get it. Superman is one of the worst major superheroes in my naive opinion. He's donut steel as fuck. Is this an unpopular opinion? (t. I don't read super comics) >he has all these powers like flying and super senses and super speed and x-ray vision and hypnotism and laser eyes and bullets don't hurt him and ......... ! >but he has one random weakness!
>>417372 >That sounds like the obligatory credits song
On the actual soundtrack album, it is the first song. In the movie, it does kick on when the credits start - note however that the main title itself is the last scene of the movie, and the credits start with various post-movie scenes news flashes, so not just your standard credit roll but more like a post-movie scene. Once the song ends, then the actual boring credit roll starts.
By the way, it's a remix of the Blue Oyster Cult original Godzilla song from 1977. That version is more hard rock but also great.
Watched X-Men Apocalypse. "Apocalypse" is an apt title; covers much of the quality of this movie. It's MOSTLY all right, until around the middle of the movie, where it just gets idiotic. The action scenes are poorly done, disjointed, and they end up looking childish and cheap with fancy CGI doing what it can to cover that up. Apocalypse just doesn't feel like a threat, all he wants is get Prof X (ok, this is a threat in itself). But when it comes to big fights, he does nothing at all! Throughout the movie, they set him up as a godlike thing who can turn people into dust with a thought, and handwave an entire city away and raise a giant pyramid in its place. But he doesn't actually do much fighting beyond some mental imagery, and putting Quicksilver in his place. Otherwise he just sits in a force field while everyone is lasering him nonstop. The story uses several deus ex machinas to stop him, some characters get a heel turn for no reason whatsoever, and the fact that they just fucked up the entire world gets hand waved away with no consequences implied or otherwise.
It's a cgi bullshit movie and just doesn't feel heroic in any way. I'm not sure if it's even meant to be, in fact I'm not sure whatever it is supposed to be. The previous X-men movies at least had a plot and so, this one is... 1. evil guy shows up, 2. evil guy does evil shit, 3. evil guy jobs and loses to the heroes. Yawn.
>>417384 As our Lord and Savior, Razorfist, said: "It's Star Wars. You can sell cereal boxes filled with nothing but used hypodermic needles, slap the Star Wars label on it, and you will run out of boxes before you run out of customers."
>>417390 Same reason Rey could pilot the Falcon™ better than Han, without a co-pilot, and without any practice. Same reason the New Republic would turn a blind eye to a terrorist organization for years on end, do nothing then get blown up. Same reason Luke decided to murder his nephew cuz he mite b-com eebil >:( Same reason Luke then abandons the entire galaxy to an oppressive regime "cuz if I die then the Sith will also die.... except that didn't work OOOPS" Same reason why we protect what we love, not destroy what we h8! Same reason as hope being like the sun, trust your government blindly and don't ask questions YOU HOT SHOT FLY BOI!
Actually, the reason is because Force Lightning™ is iconic, and people member it from Return of The Jedi.
Ad Astra (2019) The promise: a psychological thriller where they try to find out what went wrong with a deep space manned mission, with the ship now threatening Earth. The reality: Brad Pitt monologuing about his daddy issues for 2 hours while looking at his own reflection. The outer space mystery thriller part amounts to "oh they went insane after years of isolation". Most boring space movie I've ever seen.
Saw Lost in La Mancha. Terry Gilliam is such a unique man; being an american who spent a whole lot of time with brits, gave him an accent that is a blend of "general american" and "general south english".
Terminator: Dark Fate The premise of the movie is something that an 8 year-old kid in 1992 would come up with: a woman is targeted for termination by Todd McFarlene's Spawn. No, really. There's even a key scene where they use a long-ass chain as a deadly weapon. Unexpectedly, the writing itself is equally garbage fan fiction tier. The characters are bland, the main hero turns from sobbing little girl to miss badass in no time, there are glaring plot holes, and the movie never really builds up towards anything. It just relies on a rollercoaster of spectacular CGI pyrotechniques to hide the fact that it has no depth whatsoever. But it has Arnold in it, plus Linda Hamilton reprising her role as Sarah Connor, so it's a BIG DEAL! I've seen Asylum movies with more plot than this trash.
>>417408 I'm a big sucker for Arnold movies, so as long as he gets a good role in them, I'm not against more Terminator movies. Incidentally the only single thing Dark Fate had going for it was Arnie getting some interesting character development (in fact the only character development in the movie).
>>417415 A little context: Fantomas is a 100 year old series of french novels about a bored rich guy who commits crimes for fun, while constantly getting away from the law via clever use of disguises. The 60s movies are part "modern day" adaptation, part parody/comedy. The movies are well known in France and certain european countries, but not in America.
>>417417 The first movie is cantered around an incompetent but driven gendarme trying and failing to catch Fantomas but always failing (think Inspector Zenigata). The 2 sequels are more of the same, so if the first one doesn't do it for you, neither will the rest.