Amentep

Uh, no. The "let's make it our own" approach, as you call it, isn't great for "making money", it's simply the natural byproduct of an artist within a different medium adapting and choosing to tell his own vision of a particular story, roster of characters and/or setting. Sometimes the changes can be informed by financial/money-making ambitions, sometimes by artistic ones. Tarkovsky didn't make his own vision of Roadside Picnic, which differed greatly from the source material, just to 'make money'. It's no different in this case. Nolan is under no obligation to portray the Batman villains as they were in the source material either, it is simply his take on them. As far as I'm concerned, with both Bane and the Joker he's made some of the most memorable comic book film villains to date too, perhaps precisely because these two were molded to fit the themes and conflicts that Nolan wanted to explore in either of his films. And mind that I don't think the Dark Knight trilogy is even amidst the half of Nolan's best work. But no doubt it is head and shoulders above pretty much the rest of the genre it's a part of. Hitch did this all through his career. He argued - for example - that if you took a stage play and set it all in one room that you were doing it wrong because you weren't taking advantage of what film was (and then went and broke his own rule by filming ROPE in one room - but with the illusion of it all being one shot to make up for it). A good example of this is his adaption of YOUNG AND INNOCENT which jettisons the story of the police officer doggedly pursuing a wanted man (the main story of the book) to concentrate on the wanted man trying to elude the law long enough to prove his innocence, which Hitch found to be a more interesting story. Much as I find Nolan's Batmans to be overly serious and overlong, I can't fault them for being a different take on Batman. You're talking about DC Universe. The comics themselves at this point are 20 alternate universes with different takes and they do not market themselves like that; New 52, for example, is the main timeline now, and it's at most parts a betrayal of the source material - and it IS the source material. Few things bother me more than ridiculous nerd purism. Most superhero comics aren't even good! I can't remember if I even liked a single issue of Batman I've read that wasn't The Killing Joke. Even ignoring that, Nolan's take on Batman was different for a reason - it was a different medium and a different story it was telling. If you want to see what happens when you try to take a comic book and put it on the screen, go watch Watchmen instead and see how incredibly boring it gets before they start changing stuff in the end. Sure, it gets ridiculously stupid from that point forward, but at least it's not boring. Officially the DCU consists of 52 alternate universes; originally it had infinite. The current continuity is under the "Rebirth" continuity, which is the New 52 continuity with some of the pre-New 52 Continuity restored (particularly with respect to Superman and the older group of Titans). But the idea of continuity has always been in many respects more a fan construct that was imposed on comic stories once fans got into the business; I think prior to that continuity simply consisted of what the editors (like Julie Schwartz) could remember and/or what some of the early comic fans (like Dr. Jerry Bails) could remind them of.

One forum I go to (about film) has an entire folder of threads dedicated to memorializing those who've passed away.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkn2oSs14iA&sns=em

IIRC doesn't Japanese weapon fighting styles use stances (I know the Katana has several, not so certain on others)? If my memory of that is correct, it seems like it could be an attempt to at least give a bit of a real 'feel'.

Disturbing lack of actual Venom in Venom movie trailer. I would be displeased if the movie was about internal struggle of Brock and Venom actually showed up at the climax. I imagine its more of a "it is too early for visual effects to be ready for a trailer" than anything else. But that's pure speculation on my part.

Shining Forces? Awesome! One of my favorite franchises that is entirely dead in the west. Dead pretty much everywhere isn't it? Particularly after Sega tried to rebrand Shining Force as a an action-RPG instead of a Fire Emblem rip-off clone quickly followed by a lot of other Shining games that made a hash of the whole thing. There hasn't been a Force game since 2009 and the last original Shining game (as opposed to ports / updates to their Shining Fighting Game Blade Arcus) was in 2014...

The problem with the analogy is that as I understand it, you have to have a clutch on a gear shift and you have to have a gear shift to to be a manual shifting car. You can drive a manual with two pedals (with either what volkswagen called the autostick system where moving the stick triggered a solenoid to disengage the clutch or with a product like the Duck Clutch where you press a button on your stick to disengage the clutch) but you're really just moving the clutch somewhere else than the floor and so I'm not really sure that the analogy works when comparing to video games.

Judging by some of the posts in the Deadfire area it's the end of the world Certain PC Players: "If you bring this Console Game to PC you must redesign the UI to cater to PC Players, you must support keyboard, mouse and rebinding key. These are all reasonable and imminently possible as redesigning UI and inputs, while not trivial, are completely possible without effecting core gameplay." Same Certain PC Players: "No! You can't port a PC game to Console! It can't be done! You're dumbing my game down as this is the only way you can get my glorious PC game to run on a console! NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooo00000000000000!!!!!!!:"

While I plan on playing the PC version, I could see myself double dipping for the Switch version (in fact I would double dip for a Switch version of PoE1, which would make me more inclined to double dip for PoE2...).

Jondekk Vrockdir: ..... The main character is a guy just like me. I wouldn't even have to act, just be myself. Oh, Huttfather, I don't know what to do, I don't know what to do... Jabba the Hutt: Uba seel ctaka keel hutta . Choy'z bu mattah uba? Beet choy uba've beome, Vid ninocchiooh whooh crees keel cheeka ? "Oh, choy bal jee bal? Choy bal jee bal?" Choy bettap flarvah? Keshoy! ... Tedd jeesh, bal uba sendah tee-tock uta-sha namily? Jondekk: Sure I do. Jabba: Gooddé. Causa hutta whooh ooesn't sendah tee-tock pej namilee seel sha shulu oom-al hutta. Uba look laa.Jee huujah uba aweat, jee huujah uba oom-st wedd. Anah mottah nrom ateema beet Vid weyda shot'z gonnah vigah uba haku uba huujah Jondekk: Too late. They start shooting in a week. Jabba: Jee 'sh gonnah make shash offah jab oom-fuse. Eniki? Jee huujah uba vealah lo add jeesh. Boll nop, boll bata bu partee Why did you signed Brando's lines as Jabba? Since Hurl suggested a Jabba the Hutt version of The Godfather he really needs to be one of the Corleones. Given that I wanted to do a Huttese version of "make an offer he can't refuse" line in Huttese, Don Vitto it was.

Jondekk Vrockdir: ..... The main character is a guy just like me. I wouldn't even have to act, just be myself. Oh, Huttfather, I don't know what to do, I don't know what to do... Jabba the Hutt: Uba seel ctaka keel hutta . Choy'z bu mattah uba? Beet choy uba've beome, Vid ninocchiooh whooh crees keel cheeka ? "Oh, choy bal jee bal? Choy bal jee bal?" Choy bettap flarvah? Keshoy! ... Tedd jeesh, bal uba sendah tee-tock uta-sha namily? Jondekk: Sure I do. Jabba: Gooddé. Causa hutta whooh ooesn't sendah tee-tock pej namilee seel sha shulu oom-al hutta. Uba look laa.Jee huujah uba aweat, jee huujah uba oom-st wedd. Anah mottah nrom ateema beet Vid weyda shot'z gonnah vigah uba haku uba huujah Jondekk: Too late. They start shooting in a week. Jabba: Jee 'sh gonnah make shash offah jab oom-fuse. Eniki? Jee huujah uba vealah lo add jeesh. Boll nop, boll bata bu partee

Dr. Evazan or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Became wanted in 12 Systems Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru: The Early Years The Strange Case of Slacious B. Crumb Waterworld Kamino Mad Max Rebo: Beyond Thunderdome Quatermass and the Sarlacc Pit Monster

As someone who liked the Star Wars universe, I am not crazy about stories built around what appear to be points of continuity. Rogue One gets a semi pass as it was the first spin-off film, but I don't care about young han or obi-wan either before Phantom Menace or between Revenge of the Sith/A New Hope. I might still see them if their trailers and reviews convince me to. However I can't help but wonder if enough people feel the same as me to the extent that the box office is weak for the films, will TPTB think that people aren't going to the theater because they want to see something setting forth new stories with Star Wars' setting (what I'd like to see) or will they just think "Oh people don't want to see Star Wars if its not one of the main episodes"...?

Good dumb or bad dumb or indifferent dumb?

The Solo thing is a teaser trailer - its hard to really say a lot about how the film will feel from a teaser, IMO. I can't say it piqued my interest like some teasers have, as it doesn't really have a lot to grab onto other than some nostalgia, IMO.

In my defense, I've not seen GUNS in a decade.

Guns of Navarone is another good one - right now other than Peck and David Niven, I can't remember any of that team.

Saving Private Ryan was mentioned earlier. I offered an earlier parallel film. Arguably much of The Dirty Dozen's characters are stock. Right now I couldn't really tell them apart except three. But that's my position; others may remember them vividly.

Wasn't saying it was.

Dirty Dozen is a good parallel (IMO) with Rogue One. A bunch of prisoners who aren't very likeable for the most part are sent on a suicide mission.

I have a lot of fun with Skyrim, but I don't really see it as a RPG. The Bethesda ES and FALLOUTS are almost a genre to themselves.

It irritated me that when the Destiny Ascension is first seen, a comment is made about how big its main gun was and they spend the rest of the series studiously not having it fired in action. Has no one at Bioware heard of Chekov's gun? Because they literally introduced a gun in the first act that they never fired. Frankly, if I was rewriting Mass Effect, I'd throw out the entirety of the third game and start over.

I wonder if what you see as 'americanized' is the result of the movie being an adaption of a UK children's novel? I haven't seen Howl yet, but expect it to feel different being an adaption from an English language story.