|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Starboy: Ragnarok 
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 05:26 |
|
|
Vintersorg posted:It's funny too because the demo had no RTS bullshit in it. I wanna say none of the previews did either -- what a huge dupe. It was a pretty enjoyable open world 3rd person game but it just goes to total dog poo poo and I never finished it. Guess what: the Tim Curry demons never get a proper set of missions like the glam rock humans and black metal zombies did because they ran out of time and money part way through development. Did you know that it was originally intended to have 5 factions instead of 3? It's true.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
I am so loving pumped for Ragnarok.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
I found a hundred dollar bill on the floor and used it to buy Brutal Legend on launch day. 2008 might be the shittiest year I've ever had. What a miserable time for me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
Inzombiac posted:I am so loving pumped for Ragnarok. I don't what started this new trend of giving indie directors a bunch of money and gigantic films but I think I like it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
apatheticman posted:I don't what started this new trend of giving indie directors a bunch of money and gigantic films but I think I like it. He's made so many funny movies and Thor shouldn't be a serious movie most of the time. Goddamn. I love the whole cast.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 05:32
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:Guess what: the Tim Curry demons never get a proper set of missions like the glam rock humans and black metal zombies did because they ran out of time and money part way through development. To be fair, pretty much every game ends up stripped of a lot of its content for time and budget reasons.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 06:33
|
|
|
From what I've heard, the Marvel films are 50% directed by a combination of the action and 2nd unit directors, and 50% by the "name" director, who is really only directing the dialog and story scenes. The action/2nd unit directors are directing all the big ticket action and VFX-heavy sequences. That's why you get the guys who directed Arrested Development and Community directing $200 millon dollar comic book movies. Marvel hires strong story & character directors for the talkie bits and then relies on experienced action directors for the other stuff. Seems to be working pretty well for them so far.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 06:45
|
|
|
Dillbag posted:From what I've heard, the Marvel films are 50% directed by a combination of the action and 2nd unit directors, and 50% by the "name" director, who is really only directing the dialog and story scenes. The action/2nd unit directors are directing all the big ticket action and VFX-heavy sequences. That's why you get the guys who directed Arrested Development and Community directing $200 millon dollar comic book movies. Marvel hires strong story & character directors for the talkie bits and then relies on experienced action directors for the other stuff. Seems to be working pretty well for them so far. Didn't work out so well for Edgar Wright 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 06:47
|
|
|
Dillbag posted:From what I've heard, the Marvel films are 50% directed by a combination of the action and 2nd unit directors, and 50% by the "name" director, who is really only directing the dialog and story scenes. The action/2nd unit directors are directing all the big ticket action and VFX-heavy sequences. That's why you get the guys who directed Arrested Development and Community directing $200 millon dollar comic book movies. Marvel hires strong story & character directors for the talkie bits and then relies on experienced action directors for the other stuff. Seems to be working pretty well for them so far. The alternative to this is Quantum of Solace and World War Z.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 07:54
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Didn't work out so well for Edgar Wright Probably because he's directed better action than pretty much any marvel movie to date and marvel seems deeply committed to mediocre action
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 09:03
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Didn't work out so well for Edgar Wright He hated having to make a movie that had to integrate with the MCU even more than Whedon did. Whedon loving hated it, and still made two movies for them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 12:21
|
|
|
And yet Whedon is making a movie for DC's own universe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 13:14
|
|
|
Waffleman_ posted:And yet Whedon is making a movie for DC's own universe. Well, the difference being that the Batgirl movie isn't something that DC has been planning and building up to via five films within the span of four years or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 13:28
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Didn't work out so well for Edgar Wright Baby Driver looks great so im not too hurt. An Edgar Wright Ant Man with Paul Rudd would have been the greatest though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
SleepCousinDeath posted:Well, the difference being that the Batgirl movie isn't something that DC has been planning and building up to via five films within the span of four years or whatever. Whedon is making a Batgirl movie? Ugh. Dude used to be able to hide his weird fetishism, but starting with Doll House the mask began to slip and it's just getting more and more obvious he's a creepy weirdo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:He hated having to make a movie that had to integrate with the MCU even more than Whedon did. Whedon loving hated it, and still made two movies for them. And yet avengers are the worst of the marvel movies. I don't think marvel was the problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Inzombiac posted:I am so loving pumped for Ragnarok. The trailer is great, too. Thor is such a goofy yobbo. "I know this guy from work!" 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
I wasn't interested until I saw that it has both Goldblum and Blanchett chewing scenery. I'm in.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Didn't work out so well for Edgar Wright He chose to walk away from it. The Avengers crossover stuff the studio mandated was literally just two scenes (the opening flashback and the fight with birdman at the Avengers HQ), he could have just swallowed his pride and worked with them after they were willing to wait half a decade for him to finish Scott Pilgrim and World's Ens
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Waffleman_ posted:And yet Whedon is making a movie for DC's own universe. They announced that Whedon's Batgirl would be a standalone and wouldn't connect with the rest of the DCCU.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:They announced that Whedon's Batgirl would be a standalone and wouldn't connect with the rest of the DCCU. Wow, WB sure gave up on that quickly then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
Waffleman_ posted:Wow, WB sure gave up on that quickly then. I dunno, doing five big budget productions over half a decade despite none of them being received too well is actually a ludicrous level of dedication imo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 03:06
|
|
|
Bugblatter posted:I dunno, doing five big budget productions over half a decade despite none of them being received too well is actually a ludicrous level of dedication imo. Oh god they're the Uwe Boll of film studios.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
Dillbag posted:Oh god they're the Uwe Boll of film studios. Nah, do to German tax laws Uwe Boll films were profitable for their investors.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:They announced that Whedon's Batgirl would be a standalone and wouldn't connect with the rest of the DCCU. I don't remember this being said anywhere. Everyone is still talking about how it will connect to Justice League and the next Batman. Edit: It might be a "standalone" the same way Doctor Strange was to the MCU. The MSJ fucked around with this message at 05:34 on Apr 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 05:31
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:I don't remember this being said anywhere. Everyone is still talking about how it will connect to Justice League and the next Batman. LIke every single announcement for the film stresses that it is a standalone, which I'm sure was Whedon's biggest stipulation to do it. A standalone suggests that it won't be affected by the overall plot of the DCCU, and it won't affect the overall plot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 12:16
|
|
|
 
rawillkill fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Apr 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
drat, this poster got me hyped and then I looked at the IMDB filming locations quote:Showing all 6 filming locations Honestly surprised they didn't shoot this in Canada.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
To be fair, they did shoot in some of the most Detroit places in Massachusetts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:drat, this poster got me hyped and then I looked at the IMDB filming locations Right? Detroit has gorgeous, unique architecture. For a movie called Detroit, they really could have done something to showcase the city. Now it's going to look like Anywhere City, USA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 01:02
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:Right? Detroit has gorgeous, unique architecture. For a movie called Detroit, they really could have done something to showcase the city. Now it's going to look like Anywhere City, USA. It might largely have to do with that Detroit of today looks a lot different from the Detroit of forty years ago.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
Detroit today looks a hell of a lot worse than it did during the riots.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 01:58
|
|
|
How dare a movie set in 1967 not showcase modern-day Detroit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:It might largely have to do with that Detroit of today looks a lot different from the Detroit of forty years ago. FreudianSlippers posted:Detroit today looks a hell of a lot worse than it did during the riots. Vagabundo posted:How dare a movie set in 1967 not showcase modern-day Detroit. A lot of Detroit was built in the 1920s. It's only in the last few years that there has been much of any change since the riots. Detroit today is going to look a hell of a lot more like Detroit in 1967 than Boston today. Source: I'm from Detroit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
They'll have set dressing it'll be fine boys
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
They actually built exact replicas of several city blocks of 60s era Detroit for the movie. But when filming wrapped and all the jobs left, it started to fall into disrepair 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:They actually built exact replicas of several city blocks of 60s era Detroit for the movie. But when filming wrapped and all the jobs left, it started to fall into disrepair That's great, they can film the sequel there at no extra cost
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 05:32
|
|
|
Guy Mann posted:He chose to walk away from it. The Avengers crossover stuff the studio mandated was literally just two scenes (the opening flashback and the fight with birdman at the Avengers HQ), he could have just swallowed his pride and worked with them after they were willing to wait half a decade for him to finish Scott Pilgrim and World's Ens No they also wanted a funnier script. Wright and Cornish did do rewrites incorporating what Marvel asked for, then Marvel gave it to their in house writers and changed it significantly enough that Wright decided he didn't want to film what they'd written.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 13:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 05:26 |
|
|
Errybody mad they didn't use real Detroit but not that they didn't choose a black filmmaker to make that movie?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 14:51
|
|
