|
oh well that sucks.
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2009 04:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 03:25 |
|
|
bows1 posted:So a friend just told me he saw an awesome trailer that was like a commercial that would be shown in the world of the movie. It was advertising a bomb shelter like it would a vacation. Any ideas? Blast from the Past maybe? edit: Or not...
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2009 04:11
|
|
|
bows1 posted:oh well that sucks. It was most likely this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px6uxUlW0tM I just saw it today too for the first time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2009 04:15
|
|
|
From Earth posted:I think you mean this one, although it should be noted that this interpretation is not necessarily the correct one. This article describes a slightly different (and in my opinion more plausible) set of timelines. Wow, that's really fantastic and makes for a completely different interpretation of Primer than what the infamous 9 (or something)-timeline diagram posits. All the little poo poo he notes is really fantastic too, and I don't know how I missed some of it. What a great movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2009 07:47
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Can someone explain the ending to Videodrome? It was on last night and after watching it again I have no clue what's going on with it. Especially the very ending with Max Renn shooting himself in the head. Was it just a trick from Videodrome? Or is he actually supposed to transform from doing it? Videodrome isn't the kind of movie that is supposed to have an explanation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2009 07:50
|
|
|
Nuke Goes KABOOM posted:Logically speaking, that would mean that each instance of him would be traveling about - therefore there'd be an infinite number of them visiting his wife and also the ending doesn't matter as he can be replaced. This isn't really true (as I understood it at least). There's only ever one version of Henry but he slips through time. When that happens he goes back/forwards to a place for an amount of time (usually a short period) before returning to his proper place in time. So there can't be an infinite number of Henrys running about because each version would eventually go back to their proper place in time, probably after a day or so. Although yes there can be a buttload of him in the same place at the same time--his mother's death, for instance--they're all different ages of Henry and would all appear and disappear at different times. Plus once he's dead, he can't travel through time again, obviously. And while he does visit his wife in the future it's before he's actually died. Not to mention the important thing about his time travel and the novel is that he can't control his time travel so he couldn't visit her through choice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2009 14:04
|
|
|
Dancing Potato posted:I watched Miracle at St. Anna yesterday and while it was generally an overlong mess, there is one part of this overlong mess that I just did not get: why is John Leguizamo in there at all? What does his character add to the movie? Why is it even necessary to see him at all? I know Spike Lee likes to go off on tangents but this is the first time one of his bizarre parentheses seemed to have absolutely no purpose. I couldn't find any plot summaries, but wasn't Enrico the brother of Angelo? The one that was thought to be dead, and Angelo kept talking to. I thought he was part of the miracle in that he survived thanks to the soldiers. Granted, I haven't seen this movie, or had a desire to, since when it came to DVD.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2009 16:25
|
|
|
In The Incredible Hulk, after Mr Green turns the bad guy into a huge monster, he's knocked to the ground and then for no apparent reason his head starts to throb and bulge and he grins. What was that all about?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2009 21:32
|
|
|
Stoatbringer posted:In The Incredible Hulk, after Mr Green turns the bad guy into a huge monster, he's knocked to the ground and then for no apparent reason his head starts to throb and bulge and he grins. What was that all about? Some of Banner's blood got into his open head wound and he becomes The Leader. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2009 21:35
|
|
|
So what was the next step, which turned The Leader into The Mekon?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2009 22:49
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 04:21
|
|
|
KillRoy posted:I just saw the "Time Travellers Wife". Apparently the wife keeps having miscarriages because the babies have the genetic time traveling gene, and they " time travel" out of the womb. When Eric Bana time travels he pops up in random places. Does this mean there are a bunch of 3-7 month fetus's appearing out of this air? How long would they survive? What would you do if you were riding the subway and a bloody half formed fetus popped into your lap? I haven't seen the movie but I read the book (which was fantastic), the way they explain it is that the fetuses time travel out of her womb for a split second then travel back, but when they re-appear in her womb they're "mis-aligned" and that's what makes them miscarry. Human Tornada posted:That's really bizarre and surely they didn't leave that part in the movie, right? No, but in the book they outright state he meets himself and they take turns having oral sex since they view it as just masturbation. They decide to stop when his dad walks in on him pleasuring himself though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 05:56
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:I have just stared at this photo for a few minutes, looking at your name and your avatar and the photo, just staring and staring and staring away--hoping, begging, pleading for some sense to it all. To the mystery of life. No, I cannot answer you first question, but for the second I would say "because Tim Burton is high as gently caress right now." A pig. Jesus, a pig. I must sleep now. I must sleep. A pig.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 06:04
|
|
|
timeandtide posted:I have just stared at this photo for a few minutes, looking at your name and your avatar and the photo, just staring and staring and staring away--hoping, begging, pleading for some sense to it all. To the mystery of life. LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! I'M TIM BURTON AND I'M SO GOD drat WEIRD AND CRAZY! IT'S GOTTA MEAN SOMETHING RIGHT! LOOK INTO MY ENIGMATIC WORLD! IT'S SO BIZARRE AND CRAZY! IT'S LIKE NOTHING YOU'VE EVER SEEN! LOOK AT IT! LOOK AT ME! I'M TIM BURTON!
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 06:16
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! I'M TIM BURTON AND I'M SO GOD drat WEIRD AND CRAZY! IT'S GOTTA MEAN SOMETHING RIGHT! LOOK INTO MY ENIGMATIC WORLD! IT'S SO BIZARRE AND CRAZY! IT'S LIKE NOTHING YOU'VE EVER SEEN! LOOK AT IT! LOOK AT ME! I'M TIM BURTON! Why don't you love me daddy 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 06:23
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:Why don't you love me daddy Because you haven't made a good flick in a decade.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 06:28
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:Because you haven't made a good flick in a decade.  (wipes tears away with check from Hot Topic)
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 06:35
|
|
|
That was beautiful, you two. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 07:01
|
|
|
So I guess I'm the only one who has actually read Alice in Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass then?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 09:13
|
|
|
The Red Queen didn't carry around a pig in the book. You may be thinking of the Duchess, who had one very briefly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 14:42
|
|
|
That movie is combining elements of both stories like the original animated film did and the pig has a place in the story. It's not like Tim Burton just went "hey a pig would make this picture wacky!!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 15:06
|
|
|
ONE YEAR LATER posted:It's not like Tim Burton just went "hey a pig would make this picture wacky!!" I wouldn't be so sure about that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 15:12
|
|
|
timeandtide posted:I have just stared at this photo for a few minutes, looking at your name and your avatar and the photo, just staring and staring and staring away--hoping, begging, pleading for some sense to it all. To the mystery of life. I was just continuing the trend of posting pictures of folks with giant foreheads.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 17:54
|
|
|
There was a 1933 version made at Paramount with an all-star cast... and it flopped. One speculation has to do with the fact all these recognizable stars were under a ton of makeup. I'd imagine the same thing will happen here. Even though the story is borderline incoherent, Disney's film captures the anarchic tone of Caroll's book the best (even if it's not as close in adaptation). Besides, it's hard to accept White Rabbit without Bill Thompson voicing or Ed Wynn's Mad Hatter. Disney's film at least had whimsy - Burton seems to be going for fright. I can't imagine the nightmare White Rabbit will be in this film. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 18:03
|
|
|
ONE YEAR LATER posted:That movie is combining elements of both stories like the original animated film did and the pig has a place in the story. It's not like Tim Burton just went "hey a pig would make this picture wacky!!" Tori Amos did this sometime in the mid-90s - although she went a step further and had the pig suckling at her breast (perhaps a visual pun on 'suckling pig'?). C'mon Tim, get with it. Anyway, I liked The Corpse Bride. It was slight, but I liked it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 20:35
|
|
|
I was always a big fan of the ABC TV miniseries Alice in Wonderland, from the early 90s (I think). Probably sucks now, but it was great when I was a kid.Crazy Mike posted:What's the name of the bonus scene that some movies have after the credits? Is there a website that has these in a non spoiler fashion so I know to expect one when I get to the theaters? This was a few pages ago, but I've been using Movie Stinger lately. I can't stand scenes after the credits. gently caress you Marvel, I'm not sitting through your poo poo any more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2009 07:00
|
|
|
When did movies go from having all their credits at the beginning to having all the credits at the end? And was this change caused by moviemakers realizing people don't like sitting through long lists of names before the story starts?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2009 08:11
|
|
|
graventy posted:I was always a big fan of the ABC TV miniseries Alice in Wonderland, from the early 90s (I think). Probably sucks now, but it was great when I was a kid. 1985, featuring practically every single television personality relevant at the time. I always liked it, too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2009 12:38
|
|
|
Binowru posted:When did movies go from having all their credits at the beginning to having all the credits at the end? And was this change caused by moviemakers realizing people don't like sitting through long lists of names before the story starts? I think Star Wars was notable for forgoing the intro credits, and George Lucas was penalized (removed from the Director's Guild?) for it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2009 12:38
|
|
|
What ever happened to Bad Lieutenant II with Nick Cage? I saw a thread for it months ago but it's like it just disappeared off the face of the earth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2009 18:57
|
|
|
It opens at the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) and I believe it is mentioned in the TIFF thread a bit... edit: http://www.tiff.net/filmsandschedules/films/badlieutenantportofc jet sanchEz fucked around with this message at 19:06 on Sep 1, 2009 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2009 19:03
|
|
|
mostlikelyme posted:I think Star Wars was notable for forgoing the intro credits, and George Lucas was penalized (removed from the Director's Guild?) for it. He was fined by the Director's Guild for it and then he resigned. Star Wars was far from the first film to forego opening credits though. The earliest film I can think of doing that is Citizen Kane (which has only a title card), and I'm sure there are even earlier examples. I'm not sure when the practice of listing out all the credits in the beginning of the film ended, but I'm guessing the late 1960's or early 1970's because I can think of a lot of film with more "modern" opening credits around then.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2009 19:43
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the only film I've seen with credits at the start is Reservoir Dogs. I'm sure this is a reflection on my movie-seeing credentials.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2009 20:18
|
|
|
Based on my DVD, Apocalypse Now has NO opening credits, not even a studio logo. Select 'Play Movie' on the menu screen, and the film starts. No trailers or FBI warning, just the movie.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2009 21:29
|
|
|
Pandachops posted:I'm pretty sure the only film I've seen with credits at the start is Reservoir Dogs. I'm sure this is a reflection on my movie-seeing credentials. And that's more of QT's using a retro style than any directors guild thingy. I do remember being a kid and watching older Disney stuff and just becoming incredibly bored while waiting for the movie to start. 101 Dalmatians was really bad for that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2009 22:32
|
|
|
Binowru posted:When did movies go from having all their credits at the beginning to having all the credits at the end? And was this change caused by moviemakers realizing people don't like sitting through long lists of names before the story starts? This is pure supposition but I think it might have something to do with guilds and teamsters/IATSE (film technicians' union) gaining more power which led to their members increasingly being granted credits, so that credits became too long for the opening of the film.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2009 22:44
|
|
|
What the hell happened to Dolemite Explosion? Was it even a real movie? Aside from the Youtube trailer, it seems to have vanished entirely.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2009 23:07
|
|
|
At the beginning of Watchmen, it shows an older looking FBI warning. Is this one still prevalent and I just haven't really noticed it? Or was it used because the movie takes place in the 80's and they don't want to ruin MY IMMERSION?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2009 05:47
|
|
|
I just watched Gigantic with Paul Dano today, and I'm just a bit confused with the part Zach Galifianakis plays. I wasn't paying that much attention to the movie, but is the homeless man in his imagination or something? Who was it that shot Brian in the cabin? Was it the homeless man? I read the description of the movie and it said something about a hit man, but that doesn't seem to make sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2009 06:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 03:25 |
|
|
RedneckwithGuns posted:What ever happened to Bad Lieutenant II with Nick Cage? I saw a thread for it months ago but it's like it just disappeared off the face of the earth. US release is November 20th.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2009 06:55
|
|