Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
The Archaic
Jul 6, 2003

Are you a consultant archaeologist in North America?

Unionize today!

PM me and ask me how your future can be history!

Krinkle posted:

Someone in here eventually mentioned the history buffs youtube guy and while apocalypto was a fantastic movie apparently mel gibson confused mayans with aztecs and there were timetravelling conquistadors who showed up eight hundred years too soon.
I mean I don't give a poo poo but it wow that conflation really pissed that guy off. Haha.

There were some glaring oversights, with the Mayan empire having collapsed about 500 years before the Spanish arrived. That's not to say the Mayans completely disappeared, but they certainly wouldn't have been as numerous as the movie shown. One archaeologist I read about said they actually got the overall city and setup pretty accurately.

Some issues with the movie is that it perpetuates the myth of the Noble Savage: a romantically idealized portrait of non-industrial or "primitive" people. The movie shows the capital city is a day's walk but they act like they've never heard of it and are completely unfamiliar with their rituals. It was also considered a great honour to be chosen for sacrifice, they would have probably known about the eclipse since their astronomy was nearly as good as Europe's.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

jsoh
Mar 24, 2007

O Muhammad, I seek your intercession with my Lord for the return of my eyesight
yeah in aztec society being a sacrifice was a big deal , and for some of the sacrifices at least you would be chosen a year in advance and for that year you lived as the avatar of god with all of the benefits that entails

revdrkevind
Dec 15, 2013
ASK:lol: ME:lol: ABOUT:lol: MY :lol:TINY :lol:DICK

also my opinion on :females:
:haw::flaccid: :haw: :flaccid: :haw: :flaccid::haw:
I really wish I could find a dumb wrestling game to play with friends. I miss doing the thing they do in the stream. Just a character creator and vs, that's all I need.

Krinkle posted:

Someone in here eventually mentioned the history buffs youtube guy and while apocalypto was a fantastic movie apparently mel gibson confused mayans with aztecs and there were timetravelling conquistadors who showed up eight hundred years too soon.
I mean I don't give a poo poo but it wow that conflation really pissed that guy off. Haha.

CineD level ranting: To my mind, the controversy is that it comes across like a lot of people credit Gibson with making a really good movie about brown people and this excuses his other problems. Really he did the usual stretching the truth to make the bloodiest possible story about a noble savage civilization he kind of had to dream up to make happen, and throwing in the white people at the end could be viewed in a way that's a little disquieting. I don't view the film that way, but given the angle where people think that movie makes an excuse for him, it's equally (in-)valid to say there are problems with it so no it doesn't. If you think it's a great film, cool, just leave it at that.

Grevling
Dec 18, 2016

Krinkle posted:

Someone in here eventually mentioned the history buffs youtube guy and while apocalypto was a fantastic movie apparently mel gibson confused mayans with aztecs and there were timetravelling conquistadors who showed up eight hundred years too soon.
I mean I don't give a poo poo but it wow that conflation really pissed that guy off. Haha.

The History Buffs guy is annoying, but he's right that Mel Gibson takes the lazy route in Apocalypto. It's a good film, but Gibson obviously wasn't interested in accurately portraying the Mayan civilization and he also put in the white guys coming in with Christianity to save the Indians from themselves (the remaining 2/100 or something who didn't die from smallpox lol).

MrSlam
Apr 25, 2014

And there you sat, eating hamburgers while the world cried.

Grevling posted:

he also put in the white guys coming in with Christianity to save the Indians from themselves (the remaining 2/100 or something who didn't die from smallpox lol).

I always saw that as white guys coming in to finish the job. Like their arrival wasn't the second coming, it was the apocalypse as far as their civilization was concerned. These days conquistadors showing up on your coastline is considered a pretty bad omen.

Hackers film 1995
Nov 4, 2009

Hack the planet!

fyi: jack shares a common ancestor with a melon

Grevling
Dec 18, 2016

MrSlam posted:

I always saw that as white guys coming in to finish the job. Like their arrival wasn't the second coming, it was the apocalypse as far as their civilization was concerned. These days conquistadors showing up on your coastline is considered a pretty bad omen.

It's still a bad misinterpretation of history, since we know the Mayans collapsed centuries before any Spanish arrived. And it's hard not to think, after seeing how horrific Mayan society is, that the coming of the Europeans isn't supposed to be a good thing.

Krinkle
Feb 9, 2003

Ah do believe Ah've got the vapors...
Ah mean the farts


The Archaic posted:

There were some glaring oversights, with the Mayan empire having collapsed about 500 years before the Spanish arrived. That's not to say the Mayans completely disappeared, but they certainly wouldn't have been as numerous as the movie shown. One archaeologist I read about said they actually got the overall city and setup pretty accurately.

Some issues with the movie is that it perpetuates the myth of the Noble Savage: a romantically idealized portrait of non-industrial or "primitive" people. The movie shows the capital city is a day's walk but they act like they've never heard of it and are completely unfamiliar with their rituals. It was also considered a great honour to be chosen for sacrifice, they would have probably known about the eclipse since their astronomy was nearly as good as Europe's.

The one thing the history youtube man liked was when the eclipse is about to happen and the priest gives the chief a wink and starts hamming it up oh god if you want us to stop the killings show us a sign. They knew it was coming and used it as a wizard of oz trick to pull one over on the rubes.

But he got super mad that there was smallpox before the spanish even arrived, that the mayans had aztec numbers of sacrifices completely with torso pile blood rivers, that the people who by definition would have been only alive because they live in the shadow of a city have never heard of a city a day's walk away, etc, etc.

It's fun to watch people who care very strongly about one thing just go off about all the problems. Like guns are dumb and it's lame to know anything about them but it's fun to watch someone go off on how mad they are that a movie showed a slow motion entire-bullet-and-shell-casing spiraling into the vampire's brain and how the guy called it a clip and it's actually a magazine and lugers don't go blam blam they go pitang pitang jesus gently caress let me make your movie you idiots. It will be a movie about assembling and disassembling various guns for 90 minutes while I drone monotonously about every step correctly.

Quantum of Phallus
Dec 27, 2010

Movies aren't real, morans!!!

revdrkevind
Dec 15, 2013
ASK:lol: ME:lol: ABOUT:lol: MY :lol:TINY :lol:DICK

also my opinion on :females:
:haw::flaccid: :haw: :flaccid: :haw: :flaccid::haw:

Krinkle posted:

The one thing the history youtube man liked was when the eclipse is about to happen and the priest gives the chief a wink and starts hamming it up oh god if you want us to stop the killings show us a sign. They knew it was coming and used it as a wizard of oz trick to pull one over on the rubes.

But he got super mad that there was smallpox before the spanish even arrived, that the mayans had aztec numbers of sacrifices completely with torso pile blood rivers, that the people who by definition would have been only alive because they live in the shadow of a city have never heard of a city a day's walk away, etc, etc.

It's fun to watch people who care very strongly about one thing just go off about all the problems. Like guns are dumb and it's lame to know anything about them but it's fun to watch someone go off on how mad they are that a movie showed a slow motion entire-bullet-and-shell-casing spiraling into the vampire's brain and how the guy called it a clip and it's actually a magazine and lugers don't go blam blam they go pitang pitang jesus gently caress let me make your movie you idiots. It will be a movie about assembling and disassembling various guns for 90 minutes while I drone monotonously about every step correctly.

One, wut.

Two, they had great calendars and astronomy so the eclipse's coming probably would have been common knowledge.

Three, John Wick 2 was loving amazing.

:colbert:

Krinkle
Feb 9, 2003

Ah do believe Ah've got the vapors...
Ah mean the farts


John Wick 1 was pretty great so I'm hoping 2 is good too.

a bone to pick
Sep 14, 2011

by FactsAreUseless
I was worried at the beginning of John Wick 2, it was shaping up to be an exact carbon copy of the first movie. It got extremely good after the first act though.

Justin Credible
Aug 27, 2003

happy cat


mng posted:

What did made me roll my eyes was his bully-become-best-buds going all Rambo several times with his BAR, hip firing down dozens of Japanese soldiers. He's not a historical figure like John Basilone who picked up a Browning machine gun, burning himself in the process, and did save his buddies. That's badass, whatever the other guy did was just Hollywood nonsense.

This stuck out to me and probably will to a lot of people, it was easily the stupidest part of the movie from a technical sense. That thing has twenty rounds it spits out in like 2 seconds, then the dead man's click.


A GLISTENING HODOR posted:

Dark Knight Sucks, So What?

Batman Begins was way worse, the action scenes were very poorly shot and edited, it felt sloppy as gently caress and I can't think of a technique seemingly designed to annoy the audience more than shooting intricate action scenes entirely in shakeycam. Then we'll edit it like the mindsex scene from Demolition Man. It gets dialed back in DK and while it has issues it feels pretty consistent in tone in terms of most of the characters and the movie as a whole. That first one is like at the bottom, really.

Quantum of Phallus
Dec 27, 2010

Chris Nolan is like if you got a somewhat advanced AI to direct a film.

Hell Yeah
Dec 25, 2012

the two most hated membrs of RLM duke it out for the title of worst of the worst in the only appropriate colloseum for a battle of this magnitude:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsG92UNtAnc#t=36s

Hell Yeah fucked around with this message at 20:31 on Feb 16, 2017

super sweet best pal
Nov 18, 2009

Marathoning old RLM is like seeing a man die in high speed.

revdrkevind
Dec 15, 2013
ASK:lol: ME:lol: ABOUT:lol: MY :lol:TINY :lol:DICK

also my opinion on :females:
:haw::flaccid: :haw: :flaccid: :haw: :flaccid::haw:

a bone to pick posted:

I was worried at the beginning of John Wick 2, it was shaping up to be an exact carbon copy of the first movie. It got extremely good after the first act though.

I'm going to spoiler this because just go see John Wick 2 everyone, it's Keanu Reeves shooting people. It's great. I loved that the following wasn't spoiled for me, even though it's totally not a spoiler at all.

But how did you come to that conclusion?

They were pretty clearly intentionally playing off the first movie, especially for anyone who's "in the know" they got Peter Stormare to play the boss. He's the Swede from Fargo who went "where's pancakes house", one of the most famous "that guy"s in the biz. And they superlative everything from the last movie- WITH A loving PAIN SEAL! It's like a confidence test where they wanted to open up showing not only could they duplicate the first movie, but if they filmed it again, the fight scenes would be better choreographed and it would be more brutal. A lot of technical aspects- like having the camera shots looking right into stunt cars inches from the metal- are marvels. If I was being asked to invest in the movie and they showed me that scene I'd be raining money and screaming WELL I GUESS.

The opening of the movie absolutely is saying that it's going to be more of the same- only turned up to a whole new plateau.

WampaLord
Jan 14, 2010

Quantum of Phallus posted:

Movies aren't real, morans!!!

The terrible things Mel Gibson said, however, are real. I don't care how good he is at making movies, he's a loving rear end in a top hat.

Endless Trash
Aug 12, 2007


I also hate white people who say ignorant things when they're extremely intoxicated

So anyways whens the next BotW

a bone to pick
Sep 14, 2011

by FactsAreUseless

WampaLord posted:

The terrible things Mel Gibson said, however, are real. I don't care how good he is at making movies, he's a loving rear end in a top hat.

So is Roger Waters but I still love Pink Floyd's music.


revdrkevind posted:

But how did you come to that conclusion?

Hey man you wrote a lot of words that I'm not gunna read but basically he was forced out of retirement yet again and his house got destroyed again so at first it seemed like it was going to be almost the same plot as the first movie, then they had another rave scene and I thought "wow they're literally just copying everything about the first movie", but obviously things took a much different direction after that.

You have to admit the first act was extremely similar.

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008
I don't have to like mel gibson to wanna see that blond ladies butt some more.

Arc Hammer
Mar 4, 2013

Got any deathsticks?

Krinkle posted:

Someone in here eventually mentioned the history buffs youtube guy and while apocalypto was a fantastic movie apparently mel gibson confused mayans with aztecs and there were timetravelling conquistadors who showed up eight hundred years too soon.
I mean I don't give a poo poo but it wow that conflation really pissed that guy off. Haha.

Not as bad as his review of Kingdom of Heaven where he hated the film for its unrealistic depiction of christianity despite Scott's film very clearly targeting modern christian audiences for criticism.
Or maybe he just didn't watch the Director's Cut where it makes it pretty drat clear that David Thewlis's character is pretty much a messenger for God trying and failing to get both sides to stop hacking people to death.

a bone to pick
Sep 14, 2011

by FactsAreUseless
did you know?

In that skit on HitB where Plinkett gets his colostomy bag returned and it breaks, all the diarrhea falls out on a picture of Kevin Smith. I keep learning these little details that make me love these guys so much more.

KakerMix
Apr 8, 2004

8.2 M.P.G.
:byetankie:

FrensaGeran posted:

I also hate white people who say ignorant things when they're extremely intoxicated

So anyways whens the next BotW

Whiskey is my source of antisemitism, vodka is really liquid racewar.

The Anime Liker
Aug 8, 2009

by VideoGames

KakerMix posted:

Whiskey is my source of antisemitism, vodka is really liquid racewar.

Alcohol doesn't create racism.

Just look at teetotaler and grand imperial wizard and Trump surrogate/body double Rich Evans.

KakerMix
Apr 8, 2004

8.2 M.P.G.
:byetankie:

A GLISTENING HODOR posted:

Alcohol doesn't create racism.

Just look at teetotaler and grand imperial wizard and Trump surrogate/body double Rich Evans.

Rich Evans suffers from fetal alcohol syndrome obv.

Junkfist
Oct 7, 2004

FRIEND?
Will the next Suicide Squad finally confirm the DC/Apocalypto shared universe?

JediTalentAgent
Jun 5, 2005
Hey, look. Look, if- if you screw me on this, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine, you rat bastard!

LanceHunter posted:

The Wachowskis would legitimately make the best possible Wonder Woman movie. It might still be a trainwreck, but it would be the best possible movie for that character.


That's pretty ridiculous of them, because Marvel was definitely first out of the gate with "unexpectedly indie director doing a superhero movie" trend. Brian Singer on X-Men, John Favreau on Iron Man, Kenneth Branagh on Thor, Jose Whedon on The Avengers, and James Gunn on Guardians of the Galaxy. None of those guys were blockbuster directors, they were all somewhere on the indie/auteur spectrum before Marvel chose them.

Not that massive indie cred even matters when creating great movies. The Russo Brothers had by far the most workmanlike resume before Marvel, and still created some of its best films.

I'm going to be all over the place in this post because it's kind of hard to focus on one point, so forgive me.

Marvel sort of grabbed underhyped directors that weren't known for breaking any big molds, whose casting wasn't making hype, though. The term 'workmanlike' has become a negative term to describe a sort of capable, but plain style of filmmaking. DC has seemingly been picking and going after name directors or directors with a specific credential, but Marvel I think was more than willing to just pick anyone who would do what they wanted and fill their MCU vision. Branagh seems like he'd do a movie with some Shakespearan-superhero flair fits well enough. Joe Johnston has a history of sort of nostalgic/Americana movies, so he fits well enough. Whedon is has some fan following and is already known for ensemble stuff with clever dialog, so he probably works.

This is all before the massive success of Avengers, though, and the increase in people actually giving a drat about comic books again.

DC movies seem to promote themselves as a film by _________, while Marvel seem to be less apt to do that.

Here is sort of a theory I have about comic book movies, though: Filmmakers and actors, for a long time, have had a complicated relationship with them. I have felt that a lot of people who get involved with them really didn't want to be. They were just a means to an end. They were films that for a long time didn't get any respect, very little prestige, but they had an expected level of presumed popularity and success already attached with them regardless, so they didn't really matter as much who did them. Being tossed as comic book movie as your first big studio project as an up and coming filmmaker/actor seems like a sink or swim scenario.

If you got hooked up to a really good one that was successful, it gave you a lot more room and opportunity in your 'real' Hollywood career to do the films you WANTED to, it could get you the attention and exposure to more respectable films, but it could also severely typecast you. On the further downside, being attached to a recognizable superhero movie flop as the title character or director could derail your career. I think that's why a lot of times you'd see less popular actors headlining the films and the more popular actors serving in supporting and one-off villain roles. It's easy to ham it up a villain or a supporting character as a big star for a big paycheck to add some drawing power to the film. You're generally remembered as the best part of even a bad movie. It's easier for a big celebrity to write off a bad supporting/villain role in a bad superhero movie as, "Well, it was for my kids/grandkids, it was an easy paycheck, it was for a lark because I'd never done anything like that, etc."

So for a long time I think directors/actors were hesitant to be too attached to those kinds of films because they could very easily be a blight on your career. It's just a theory of mine, though.

I have more to say about this, probably, but that's just really the gist of it

JediTalentAgent fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Feb 16, 2017

JB50
Feb 13, 2008

KakerMix posted:

Rich Evans suffers from fetal alcohol syndrome obv.

Hes a crack baby, thats different.

Echo Chamber
Oct 16, 2008

best username/post combo
I think they should stop making DC movies.

Quantum of Phallus
Dec 27, 2010

Echo Chamber posted:

I think they should stop making DC movies.

I want them to keep making them and everyone involved gets fired for incompetence. I love how WB/DC have given Zach Snyder something like $750m by now to make his garbage films.

Space Crabs
Mar 10, 2007

by FactsAreUseless

JediTalentAgent posted:

I'm going to be all over the place in this post because it's kind of hard to focus on one point, so forgive me.

Marvel sort of grabbed underhyped directors that weren't known for breaking any big molds, whose casting wasn't making hype, though. The term 'workmanlike' has become a negative term to describe a sort of capable, but plain style of filmmaking. DC has seemingly been picking and going after name directors or directors with a specific credential, but Marvel I think was more than willing to just pick anyone who would do what they wanted and fill their MCU vision. Branagh seems like he'd do a movie with some Shakespearan-superhero flair fits well enough. Joe Johnston has a history of sort of nostalgic/Americana movies, so he fits well enough. Whedon is has some fan following and is already known for ensemble stuff with clever dialog, so he probably works.

This is all before the massive success of Avengers, though, and the increase in people actually giving a drat about comic books again.

DC movies seem to promote themselves as a film by _________, while Marvel seem to be less apt to do that.

Here is sort of a theory I have about comic book movies, though: Filmmakers and actors, for a long time, have had a complicated relationship with them. I have felt that a lot of people who get involved with them really didn't want to be. They were just a means to an end. They were films that for a long time didn't get any respect, very little prestige, but they had an expected level of presumed popularity and success already attached with them regardless, so they didn't really matter as much who did them. Being tossed as comic book movie as your first big studio project as an up and coming filmmaker/actor seems like a sink or swim scenario.

If you got hooked up to a really good one that was successful, it gave you a lot more room and opportunity in your 'real' Hollywood career to do the films you WANTED to, it could get you the attention and exposure to more respectable films, but it could also severely typecast you. On the further downside, being attached to a recognizable superhero movie flop as the title character or director could derail your career. I think that's why a lot of times you'd see less popular actors headlining the films and the more popular actors serving in supporting and one-off villain roles. It's easy to ham it up a villain or a supporting character as a big star for a big paycheck to add some drawing power to the film. You're generally remembered as the best part of even a bad movie. It's easier for a big celebrity to write off a bad supporting/villain role in a bad superhero movie as, "Well, it was for my kids/grandkids, it was an easy paycheck, it was for a lark because I'd never done anything like that, etc."

So for a long time I think directors/actors were hesitant to be too attached to those kinds of films because they could very easily be a blight on your career. It's just a theory of mine, though.

I have more to say about this, probably, but that's just really the gist of it

you could have achieved the same effect with "DC movies suck. Marvel movies don't suck as much."

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"

Echo Chamber posted:

I think they should stop making comic book movies.

hemale in pain
Jun 5, 2010




Hell Yeah posted:

the two most hated membrs of RLM duke it out for the title of worst of the worst in the only appropriate colloseum for a battle of this magnitude:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsG92UNtAnc#t=36s

I'm so excited to see Josh on the show! I need to go watch the full episode.

Hell Yeah
Dec 25, 2012

hemale in pain posted:

I'm so excited to see Josh on the show! I need to go watch the full episode.

i agree josh owns :rock:

JediTalentAgent
Jun 5, 2005
Hey, look. Look, if- if you screw me on this, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine, you rat bastard!
I think part of the DC problem is that they don't have a good game plan for scaling up their universe, either. They started too big and didn't have any room to grow as easily.

Quantum of Phallus
Dec 27, 2010

Exactly. They blew their load with Batman v Superman and now there's nothing. Like who gives a gently caress about a Aquaman movie ???

WampaLord
Jan 14, 2010

Quantum of Phallus posted:

Exactly. They blew their load with Batman v Superman and now there's nothing. Like who gives a gently caress about a Aquaman movie ???

I'm pretty hyped, it's got my man Vincent Chase in it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5GOrfcZg9E

Looks good imo.

naem
May 29, 2011

JediTalentAgent posted:

I think part of the DC problem is that they don't have a good game plan for scaling up their universe, either. They started too big and didn't have any room to grow as easily.

They could do a closer, more personal movie for BatFleck with some quality brooding and humanizing

And then just show lots of galga-doe's body parts while she chops people and don't let her talk too much (it's an origin movie just show exotic locals and action)

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

The Anime Liker
Aug 8, 2009

by VideoGames
Sorry, Batman is the Iron Man character, Wonder Woman is the Captain America, and for some reason Superman is Batman.

Batfleck doesn't brood. He does science and quips.

  • Locked thread