|
penismightier posted:In Zero Hour, the movie that Airplane is a parody/remake of, it's grilled halibut. wikipedia posted:
I think it is funny that they used the actual script.
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2010 08:10
|
|
EVERYTHING I SAY ABOUT JAPAN OR LIVING IN JAPAN IS COMPLETELY WRONG, BUT YOU BETTER BELIEVE I'LL 
ABOUT IT.
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:23 |
|
|
kapalama posted:I think it is funny that they used the actual script. I didn't know about that earlier movie http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q__vuyH1JEI scene by scene comparison is pretty funny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2010 05:46
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:The choices were steak or fish, no specifics. Awesome, thank you very much
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2010 23:42
|
|
Zogo posted:I didn't know about that earlier movie I'm going to have to go back and watch Airplane! in black and white now.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2010 19:15
|
|
|
Zogo posted:I didn't know about that earlier movie This is awesome. Incidentally, does anyone know the first use of that montage of old timey flying machine stock footage? The ones in the flashbacks that Stryker has. I've seen it elsewhere; in a Freakazoid episode I think and definitely references to it in the Simpsons
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2010 04:02
|
|
|
While watching the AMC Back to the Future Marathon earlier, I was wondering if there are any other series that switched up cast members between installments? Other than Bond films, all the series I can think of keep the same cast, and if someone doesn't come back, normally that character has been killed off or left for another reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 08:22
|
|
|
Batman Begins -> Dark Knight Mortal Kombat for Raiden The Matrix trilogy for the Oracle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 08:26
|
|
|
The Vacation series may have different actors for the kids in every single film. Edit: Motherfucker, they got the original Audrey to return for Christmas Vacation 2: Cousin Eddie's Island Adventure so it was a record of recasting which lasted 20 years and four films and broken with the fifth. Bummer. Edit2: It should be mentioned that B-movie DTV series have lots of sequels with recast leads as one action star is replaced with another after they get tired or whatever. I figure you're after more reputable stuff than that. Ape Agitator fucked around with this message at 08:41 on Jan 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 08:35
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:While watching the AMC Back to the Future Marathon earlier, I was wondering if there are any other series that switched up cast members between installments? Jodi Foster was replace by Julianne Moore in the sequel to Silence of the Lambs. And Megan Fox has disappeared from the Transformers franchise. cloudchamber fucked around with this message at 12:48 on Jan 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 12:07
|
|
|
cloudchamber posted:Jodi Foster was replace by Julianne Moore in the sequel to Silence of the Lambs. And Megan Fox has disappeared from the Transformers franchise. Megan Fox's character is just not in it. It hasn't been recast.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 14:56
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:Megan Fox's character is just not in it. It hasn't been recast. She's Sam's love interest. It's practically the same role.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 15:01
|
|
|
Terrence Howard -> Don Cheadle between Iron Man 1 & 2 Ed Norton -> Mark Ruffalo between Incredible Hulk & The Avengers
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 16:32
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:While watching the AMC Back to the Future Marathon earlier, I was wondering if there are any other series that switched up cast members between installments? Richard Harris -> Michael Gambon for Dumbledore.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 16:44
|
|
|
Ninja Gamer posted:Batman Begins -> Dark Knight The entire Batman franchise has gone through radical casting changes for over 40 years. I know some people like to pretend that the Nolan Batman is the only Batman, but it's still the same character, universe and franchise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 17:55
|
|
|
jscolon2.0 posted:Ed Norton -> Mark Ruffalo between Incredible Hulk & The Avengers And Ed Norton had replaced Eric Bana (and Liv Tyler replaced Jennifer Connelly) between the Ang Lee Hulk and the most recent one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 18:22
|
|
|
I watched Cronos last night and the whole movie had this kinda jerky stop-motion-esque thing going on with the motion in it. I dunno if I can explain it better than that. My question, is that something deliberate that Del Toro did, or was Netflix messing up? Either way it gave the movie this cool other-worldly feel too it that I enjoyed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 18:25
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:The entire Batman franchise has gone through radical casting changes for over 40 years. True but TDK was most obviously a sequel to Begins whereas most of the other films can be considered separate series with the same characters. The Burton films seem pretty connected but Schumacher's don't necessarily with connect each other let alone the rest of the movies. And those are just the ones made in a short enough time frame for people to consider them connected. I doubt many think Batman (1966) is a sequel to Batman (1943) or that either one of those is connected to Batman: Under the Red Hood.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 19:23
|
|
|
haveblue posted:And Ed Norton had replaced Eric Bana (and Liv Tyler replaced Jennifer Connelly) between the Ang Lee Hulk and the most recent one. Not sure if that one really counts. I'd say it's more like the Batman films since it was technically a retelling of the same story.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 20:49
|
|
|
Ninja Gamer posted:And those are just the ones made in a short enough time frame for people to consider them connected. I doubt many think Batman (1966) is a sequel to Batman (1943) or that either one of those is connected to Batman: Under the Red Hood. Which is idiotic, because they obviously all are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 21:58
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Which is idiotic, because they obviously all are. So Heath Ledger's Joker is a zombie I guess? Or Jack Nicholson was pretending to be dead at the end of the '89 movie?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 00:40
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:So Heath Ledger's Joker is a zombie I guess? Or Jack Nicholson was pretending to be dead at the end of the '89 movie? Multiverse
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 00:49
|
|
|
Squid Hat posted:I watched Cronos last night and the whole movie had this kinda jerky stop-motion-esque thing going on with the motion in it. I dunno if I can explain it better than that. I'm curious about this because I started to watch it the other night on Netflix and the same thing was going on. It was really distracting, so I turned it off after a couple minutes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 00:52
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:While watching the AMC Back to the Future Marathon earlier, I was wondering if there are any other series that switched up cast members between installments? Ben Healy and Junior Healy in Problem Child 3: Junior in Love Tommy Jarvis changes twice between Friday the 13th 4, 5, and 6. John Connor is different in every Terminator film. The Empire Strikes Back originally had a woman as the emperor. RoboCop 3 has a new RoboCop. There are many more of course. The one that annoyed me the most was Friday the 13th however. I would've liked to see Feldman continue the role as I really liked him in part 4.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 04:20
|
|
|
Real simple one,but is The Room as funny as everyone says? I need a funny flick for bad movie night.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 06:01
|
|
|
PlasticPaddy posted:Real simple one,but is The Room as funny as everyone says? I need a funny flick for bad movie night. Oh lord you have no idea whats in store for you
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 06:03
|
|
|
PlasticPaddy posted:Real simple one,but is The Room as funny as everyone says? I need a funny flick for bad movie night. Yes, a million times yes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 06:09
|
|
|
The Room is not funny! It's not true! I did not laugh. I did NOT.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 06:24
|
|
|
Squid Hat posted:I watched Cronos last night and the whole movie had this kinda jerky stop-motion-esque thing going on with the motion in it. I dunno if I can explain it better than that. Hmmm, this post makes me realize I watch lovely horror movies on Netflix more than I should.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 06:24
|
|
|
Has anyone ever used "A Modest Proposal" as the basis for a sci-fi movie? Besides Soylent Green, which isn't even made of babies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 06:25
|
|
|
Have professional lip readers ever watched silent movies and interpreted what the actors are saying?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 00:10
|
|
|
cloudchamber posted:Have professional lip readers ever watched silent movies and interpreted what the actors are saying? Apparently, by the height of the silent era the actors had to be careful to say the right poo poo because avid filmgoers got pretty good at lipreading. ...that doesn't answer your question.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 00:22
|
|
|
I always wondered something about silent era films. Was it impossible back then to do modern-style subtitles instead of title cards? It still bugs me to have the visuals chopped up and segmented by screens of text every few seconds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 00:45
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:I always wondered something about silent era films. Was it impossible back then to do modern-style subtitles instead of title cards? It still bugs me to have the visuals chopped up and segmented by screens of text every few seconds. While it wouldn't have been impossible (just really difficult) I doubt anyone would even conceive of doing something like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 00:53
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:I always wondered something about silent era films. Was it impossible back then to do modern-style subtitles instead of title cards? It still bugs me to have the visuals chopped up and segmented by screens of text every few seconds. The optical printer hadn't been invented, so, yes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 01:01
|
|
|
I remember reading that they did experiment with different methods of showing dialogue though. One movie had comic style speech bubbles but it bombed. So it was possible at least by the end of the era. I don't think there's anything wrong with the intertitle method. One advantage is you don't miss anything from reading.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 01:44
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:I always wondered something about silent era films. Was it impossible back then to do modern-style subtitles instead of title cards? It still bugs me to have the visuals chopped up and segmented by screens of text every few seconds. Every era has its annoying artistic nonsense. I wonder what will look (or sound) ridiculous in today's films in 20 years. Granting TV being different, I was just watching a TV series from the 90's (Murder One) and the synthesizer soundtrack is really annoying. (And the women's makeup was pretty gag-inducing too). I don't imagine anyone even noticed either at the time. The reaction of people unfamiliar to Hollywood's current artistic nonsense are few and far between because of the reach of Hollywood films, but American TV, which tends not to travel as far, makes some Japanese people laugh out loud. (And vice versa). I personally hate watching old movies beacause of all the unfamiliar artifice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 01:53
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:I remember reading that they did experiment with different methods of showing dialogue though. One movie had comic style speech bubbles but it bombed. So it was possible at least by the end of the era. How did they do that, I wonder? Projecting the film onto paper with cartoon bubbles and filming that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 01:55
|
|
|
They could run the film twice through the camera while blacking out parts of the lens so the film is only exposed once each time. I know they did this as early as 1903: Alice in Wonderland. Incidentally, I see that movie also has the main title printed on it by double exposure. So that was at least possible in a crude way. I wish I could find the movie with the speech bubbles. Can't find reference to it anywhere. Although I found one source that says the movie "The Unholy Three" from 1925 has some speech bubbles in it. oh and the Alice in Wonderland movie has a cameo by the :getout : frog at 3:55  .edit2: and I just remembered one of my favorite silent movies The Navigator has some subtitles: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEio44GhwVM Schweinhund fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Jan 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 02:31
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:I always wondered something about silent era films. Was it impossible back then to do modern-style subtitles instead of title cards? It still bugs me to have the visuals chopped up and segmented by screens of text every few seconds. Aside from doing a double exposure, which would have required some complex setting up the other option is to burn in subtitles by etching them into the film which is very painful to watch as either the words shake as the film snakes through the gates and the fact the text can drop out of focus complete with rings around the letters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:23 |
|
|
300 is about a militaristic, xenophobic, sexist slave society with rituals of eugenics and 80s action movie homoeroticism that refuse to consider diplomacy and mock those who do. They project their force across neighboring cultures to destroy the outsider encroaching on its sphere of influence and are in such a state of persistent war that there is no other profession for able-bodied male citizens save soldier - lesser work is the work of the inferior slaves and women, and politics is the domain of those soldiers who have lived long enough to retire into leadership. Is 300 the political satire that time forgot?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2011 05:47
|
|
