Movies You Have Seen Lately

[astr0creep]

Just finished watching Season 1 of Gargoyles.

 

Onto Season 2...

 

 

Also, Shadow Raiders.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

You know there's something wrong when people can't understand the story of PotC 3. Anyways, saw it and yawned all the way.

 

Also got to watch Spider-Man 3 and Fantastic Four vs. the Silver Surfer.

 

Both of them crap and should have come with the subtitle "How to ruin a comic book adaptation and not to learn from Batman Begins".

Edited June 23, 2007 by Role-Player

[Pidesco]

But Spiderman 3 has pie!!!

[Tale]

The series end episode for Stargate was pretty weak ....

Canada had aired those back before December.

 

They're making two direct to video movies. One will finish the Ori series. The next one is some sort of time travelling adventure.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

But Spiderman 3 has pie!!!

 

 

I'm not even miffed about the Venom origin, even though it is crap beyond belief. "Hey guys where did it come from? WHO CARES? SPIDERMAN SPIDERMAN, BLUNDERS EVERYTHING A SEQUEL CAN". The fight scenes were terribly automated and lifeless. The most impressive thing was Sandman and his encounters with Spidey which felt, at least earlier on, like classic villain battles. But they pretty much ridiculed Parker's seedier side (good means preppy hairstyle, bad means emo style!) and Harry's dementia went on severely underplayed. And I just can't stand Drunkst.

Anyone else noticed how Bugman doesn't seem to bother with debries falling down on people but is tormented for having kissed someone else other than M.J.?

Not enough spiderweb would fill all those holes.

 

Silver Surfer was pretty awesome but then... Restoring Doom just shows a lack of ideas.

The almost Super Skrullish Johnny Storm variant is conveniently available only at the end.

Galactus... Ok, that says it all. Funny thing, a guy a few seats behind me and my squeeze kept going on "This has nothing to do with the comics" during the movie. He walked out during the scene where Galactus is dealt with, haha.

 

Something that also bothers me is the underuse of major characters. In Batman Begins, Mr. Zsasz was a random killer with no personality at all (I'm sure being played by Tim Booth had something to do with it). In Spider-Mangle 3, I kept hoping Gwen Stacy would fall to the hands of a darker, bloodthirsty Harry. But they couldn't even tie her in significantly. Seriously, what's the point of using a recognizable character if it plays out nothing like the original? I can't wait for Spider-Man 4 where Aunt May will be a flying guy with lasers coming out of his eyes and an adamantium wang.

 

 

Spider 3 was also another missed oportunity for movie-tie ins. I can't believe directors haven't yet considered the possibility of featuring brief cameos or small roles for other characters of the same universe. IIRC, it was the Fantastic Four that originally gave Parker the idea that the symbiote disliked fire and sound. It would have been cool - specially since both movies were at the cinema - to have the FF in Spiller-Man 3 give Spidey hints on how to deal with the symbiote. Not only is it a comic book geek orgasmatron, it's also great to generate awareness of other Marvel movies and possibly interest people enough to go see them. It certainly beats placing goddamn Coke ads in films.

Edited June 23, 2007 by Role-Player

[Blarghagh]

Seriously, what's the point of using a recognizable character if it plays out nothing like the original?

 

Okay, I agree completely with the fact that Gwen Stacy was just used wrongly. However, I don't agree with this comment. If I want the exact same experience as the original, I'll just read the comics again. I have no intention of shilling out 8 bucks for a newly released movie I've already seen. I fully support directors to make their own version. A wrongly used character is a wrongly used character, even if a previous version of the character exists. I've seen plenty of re-imagined characters that are better than their originals.

Edited June 23, 2007 by TrueNeutral

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Seriously, what's the point of using a recognizable character if it plays out nothing like the original?

 

Okay, I agree completely with the fact that Gwen Stacy was just used wrongly. However, I don't agree with this comment. If I want the exact same experience as the original, I'll just read the comics again. I have no intention of shilling out 8 bucks for a newly released movie I've already seen.

 

Okay, nowhere in the post am I asking for a verbatim copy. It's about not having much in the way of recognizable traits.

In the comics Venom has a somewhat credible, even if childish backstory. In the movie it's an organism from god knows where. Yeah, at first glance it isn't very different but then there's enough exposition of the creature to let the readership focus on more important aspects. There's only the suggestion that it feeds on the host but that doesn't happen much, if at all, in the movie. No midnight web-slinging with a sleeping, but violent Spiderman beating up common criminals who has to deal with a sudden negative perception from people. No body weakness resulting from the link between them and the nightly escapades. It's basically telling the audience "this thing may be feeding on Parker and have adverse effects on his biology, but don't worry about that - here's a song and dance routine".

 

Also, how he gets rid of the alien. In the movie the decision to go to the chapel and get rid of the alien is completely out of the blue as opposed to suggested to him. When Venom is forming around Brock, notice how he seems to ignore the bells when just a few seconds ago it was writhing in agony - and it's not always clear it's because of the sound. It's only during the end that the audience is told that the sound helped.

 

It's not about "d00d its not liek teh komics!", it's about "it looks like Venom but that's almost where it ends in similarity". Not even the funny quips, the obsession with Spider's entrails or his distorted idea that he is a victim of Spiderman's actions and that he must protect other innocents from Parker ever comes into play.

 

[Pidesco]

Spider 3 was also another missed oportunity for movie-tie ins. I can't believe directors haven't yet considered the possibility of featuring brief cameos or small roles for other characters of the same universe. IIRC, it was the Fantastic Four that originally gave Parker the idea that the symbiote disliked fire and sound. It would have been cool - specially since both movies were at the cinema - to have the FF in Spiller-Man 3 give Spidey hints on how to deal with the symbiote. Not only is it a comic book geek orgasmatron, it's also great to generate awareness of other Marvel movies and possibly interest people enough to go see them. It certainly beats placing goddamn Coke ads in films.

 

I think the problem is that Marvel has followed a policy of selling movie rights to individual characters to different studios. For example, Daredevil and Spiderman can't appear in the same movie because one belongs to 20th Century Fox, while the other one belongs to Sony.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I think the problem is that Marvel has followed a policy of selling movie rights to individual characters to different studios. For example, Daredevil and Spiderman can't appear in the same movie because one belongs to 20th Century Fox, while the other one belongs to Sony.

 

I suspected as much. But it's disappointing nonetheless. I'm sure Stan could pull a few strings if he wanted, though.

[Omelette]

Just saw Night at the Museum last night. It was cute and I liked it. Very adorable movie that I'd like to watch again when I get the chance.

[Blarghagh]

Seriously, what's the point of using a recognizable character if it plays out nothing like the original?

 

Okay, I agree completely with the fact that Gwen Stacy was just used wrongly. However, I don't agree with this comment. If I want the exact same experience as the original, I'll just read the comics again. I have no intention of shilling out 8 bucks for a newly released movie I've already seen.

 

Okay, nowhere in the post am I asking for a verbatim copy. It's about not having much in the way of recognizable traits. [spoilersandstuff]

 

I was talking about Gwen Stacy mostly. Personally, I think Venom doesn't fall under this, because he was never really in Sam Raimi's vision. Marvel strongarmed him into this movie.

 

Also, while the comic book Venom was popular, the definitive pop-culture version of Venom that is responsible for most of his popularity has to be the animated series. And in that, he came from... the moon. In a rock. Yeah. It really just depends on what you view as the source material.

[Surreptishus]

I thought that Spidey 3 turned out not good because the cast and crew just didn't care as they knew this was the last film with which they would be involved. This is evidenced by the lazy half asleep acting; the forsaking of a storyline for a soppy romance yarn (with a series of cute and only mildly funny skits) and most of all by Tobey Macguire's double chin.

 

 

Oh, recently I saw Knocked Up - very funny. Seth Rogen was good but I did like Paul Rudd's character the most.

Edited June 23, 2007 by Surreptishus

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I was talking about Gwen Stacy mostly.

 

I was seriously expecting her to die at the hands of either Harry or Venom, since either could embody Spiderman's dark side (Venom probably as an alter-ego, and Harry as an embodiment of his guilt and mistakes) and because it was major in the Sprinklerman's mythos. Boy, was I in for disappointment.

 

 

Personally, I think Venom doesn't fall under this, because he was never really in Sam Raimi's vision. Marvel strongarmed him into this movie.

 

That sucks, although I'm wondering just how much better Venom could have been with a little more thought. Come to think of it, that kinda makes sense since during the whole thing Venom just seemed tacked on while Sandman felt much more natural to the film.

 

Marvel -1, even if I'm still recovering from the awesomeness that Ruins and Marvel Zombies was.

 

 

Also, while the comic book Venom was popular, the definitive pop-culture version of Venom that is responsible for most of his popularity has to be the animated series. And in that, he came from... the moon. In a rock. Yeah. It really just depends on what you view as the source material.

 

That's even worse, but I don't think it really matters when trying to set up a new origin since there's always details missing or changed when it switches mediums. It could have been handled in a much more interesting and dark sideish way :/

[WITHTEETH]

Apocalypto

I thought it was a good movie, I was entertained the whole time. I do wonder how much of it was historically accurate, I've heard controversy about it awhile back. What was the extent in which they sacrifices people?

 

I also rented Smokin Aces and Ghost Rider, i heard it was bad, but i use to read the comics so im curious!

[GreasyDogMeat]

Apocalypto was actually fairly accurate, the problem was Mel completly mixed up Mayan culture with Aztec culture.

 

The Mayans did sacrifice, but not in that manner, they also died out/disbanded as a society before ever running into any conquistadors.

 

Historically accurate or not, I thought it was an entertaining and impressive movie. I think all of the contraversy is simply over who made the movie.

Edited June 24, 2007 by GreasyDogMeat

[Shryke]

going to go see Transformers with a girl from work sometime this week

[Dark_Raven]

Dungeons and Dragons, the second movie. Far better than that piece of dung first movie.

[Wistrik]

 

Watching the Hunt for Red October DVD on my computer. I love some of these old classics. My 7950GT KO has hardware video playback abilities which help immensely.

Edited June 24, 2007 by Wistrik

[Wistrik]

Dungeons and Dragons, the second movie. Far better than that piece of dung first movie.

Interesting. Is it good enough that you could recommend it? I've seen Krull, Legend, Beastmaster, Sinbad (the various movies), etc. I like fantasy movies as long as they aren't too stupid. Of course, I was a kid when I saw most of those, so they impressed me more. Now I'd be more critical if I was to watch them again.

[Deraldin]

going to go see Transformers with a girl from work sometime this week

 

Except doesn't that open next week?

 

I finally got out to see Oceans Thirteen yesterday afternoon. Ended up in the theatre with just my parents and my little brother and an elderly couple that walked in just as the previews were starting. Overall a very enjoyable movie. I haven't seen the second one so I can't compare to that. The plans didn't seem as neat as the heist they pulled in the first movie, but I can live with that.

[Dark_Raven]

Dungeons and Dragons, the second movie. Far better than that piece of dung first movie.

Interesting. Is it good enough that you could recommend it? I've seen Krull, Legend, Beastmaster, Sinbad (the various movies), etc. I like fantasy movies as long as they aren't too stupid. Of course, I was a kid when I saw most of those, so they impressed me more. Now I'd be more critical if I was to watch them again.

I bought it on DVD for $15. Worth the price. It reminds me of the old fantasy movies that was released in the early 80's like Conan, Krull, Red Sonja, etc.

[Gorth]

Apocalypto

I thought it was a good movie, I was entertained the whole time. I do wonder how much of it was historically accurate, I've heard controversy about it awhile back. What was the extent in which they sacrifices people?

 

I also rented Smokin Aces and Ghost Rider, i heard it was bad, but i use to read the comics so im curious!

Most of the movie seems to be based on Mayan culture:

 

http://www.civilization.ca/civil/maya/mmc03eng.html

 

Except, as GreasyDogMeat pointed out, they were all dead and gone when the Europeans showed up.

 

The Aztecs were the ones doing sacrifices when Cortez reached their capital. Estimates varies from 20000 to 250000 humans sacrified per year.

Edited June 24, 2007 by Gorth

[Shryke]

going to go see Transformers with a girl from work sometime this week

 

Except doesn't that open next week?

 

well i was checking out screening times, and there's a midnight showing on like wednesday

[Oerwinde]

Just finished season 5 of Stargate. Daniel Jackson is awesome. Too bad he's "dead" for a season.

[Calax]

Just finished season 5 of Stargate. Daniel Jackson is awesome. Too bad he's "dead" for a season.

they ended the series :'(

 

at least we have a movie coming out soon to tie up the story line.