|
Mr Hootington posted:Someone hasnt watched atlas shrugged. A lot of people haven't, actually.
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 03:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 08:45 |
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:Someone hasnt watched atlas shrugged. Well he did say “watchable” good day for a bris fucked around with this message at 04:09 on Dec 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:Someone hasnt watched atlas shrugged. That specific movie hasn't come out yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
For almost ten years, you have been asking: Who is HYDRA? This is Tony Stark speaking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 09:27
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I wouldn't quite go that far, but I definitely wouldn't say he's right off the page either. I mean I like Winter Soldier and most of the First Avenger, and he works well with the versions of Tony and Nick Fury in the film universe, but it just doesn't quite feel like the same character to me. I can't picture Chris Evans telling people about how awesome the democratic process is or whatever. The character is usually focused much more on personal issues and "getting the bad guys" than standing for a particular ideal. Right. He's portraying a different Cap, not quite the comic book version, He's not quite the Icon and symbol that his comic counterpart is. I feel like Whedon tried to make him closer to his symbolic legend counterpart, but that didn't quite work out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFMY99NXOgc This scene is exactly the kind of scene you'd see in a comic book, but it falls flat on the screen. Cap is out of breath, that's not exactly the voice to command a god, and that outfit looks atrocious. For whatever reason, they didn't manage to pull that scene off. He does a lot better job of being a supercop than inspirational figure.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 10:41
|
|
|
Here's an article from Forbes which summarises some of the most anticipated movies of 2018. Avengers 3 and Black Panther are at the top of the list which should come as no surprise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Here's an article from Forbes which summarises some of the most anticipated movies of 2018. I'm looking forward to BP more the A3.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
I'm looking forward to Aquaman most, then BP, then A3, but probably a bunch of other lovely movies in there too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
Momoa makes everything great but I am so goddamned gay for Michael B Jordan's hair in Black Panther that nothing else is really registering on my radar.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
A lot of those movies are coming out in May/June which is probably why Disney's expecting Solo to bomb (it's out a fortnight after Avengers 3, a week before Deadpool 2 and a fortnight before Ocean's 8 and Incredibles 2).
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
I am looking most forward to Shazam!
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:I'm looking forward to Aquaman most, then BP, then A3, but probably a bunch of other lovely movies in there too. Why are you excited for aqua man? That sounds like me being a dick but it isn’t meant that way. All I know about it is that it’s a DC movie and their track record sucks boiling rear end so I’m wondering what makes it different.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Yeah, I’m curious too. From everything I’m hearing it doesn’t sound like Aquaman was one of the bright spots of JL.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Momoa makes everything great but I am so goddamned gay for Michael B Jordan's hair in Black Panther that nothing else is really registering on my radar. Lmao I dig it but he just looks like The Weeknd to me
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
I want to be excited abput aquaman, but the dcmu is a smoldering dumpster fire.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:Lmao I dig it but he just looks like The Weeknd to me Quit trying to ruin this for me!
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
I think A Wrinkle In Time looks like it might be good though I may be too old for it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:Why are you excited for aqua man? Because he's one of three people that continuously defend DC movies in this thread, gotta toe that party line.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:Why are you excited for aqua man? That sounds like me being a dick but it isn’t meant that way. All I know about it is that it’s a DC movie and their track record sucks boiling rear end so I’m wondering what makes it different. I like all the DC movies except Justice league better than most marvel movies. And James Wan rules.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
I like how everyone kept making memes about how radical the guy playing Aquaman is based purely on him looking cool and then he's just really boring in the film.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:Lmao I dig it but he just looks like The Weeknd to me Rhyno posted:Quit trying to ruin this for me! Is this really a bad thing? I know his latest ain't his greatest but I figured that's because he lost the hair, like Samson.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Sgt. Politeness posted:Is this really a bad thing? I'm just not the biggest fan of the dude. That isn't to say he doesn't have talent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Vincent Chase is a much better Aquaman than Jason Momoa.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
I don’t know who that is and got it confused with Vincent Price and I was like “hmm, that’s an interesting take.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I like how everyone kept making memes about how radical the guy playing Aquaman is based purely on him looking cool and then he's just really boring in the film. All of his scenes felt so awkwardly forced
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
People are allowed to like Aquaman just because of his hotness if they want. It is permitted.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
I was excited for Aquaman because I got Justin Lin and James Wan confused in my head. Now, I'm a lot less so.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
fruit on the bottom posted:I don’t know who that is and got it confused with Vincent Price and I was like “hmm, that’s an interesting take.” The greatest tragedy of the 21st century is that Vincent Price wasn't around to play Dr. Strange.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
Oh man that would have been great.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
Old Kentucky Shark posted:I was excited for Aquaman because I got Justin Lin and James Wan confused in my head. Now, I'm a lot less so. I'd be fine with either one, Furious 7 was glorious. EDIT: To elaborate the movie ended with The Rock flexing out of a cast, driving a ambulance into a predator drone, picking up a minigun from the wreckage and using it to shoot down another predator drone. While Vin Diesel fought Jason Statham with a pair of Gian wrenches on top of a crumbling parking lot. And it was awesome. David D. Davidson fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Dec 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
David D. Davidson posted:I'd be fine with either one, Furious 7 was glorious. You forgot how the fight ended. With Vin Diesel stamping so hard on the building they were standing on to make it break off and collapse with Jason Statham on it. This does not kill or permanently injure Jason Statham. It's important to remember that the Fast and Furious movies are Urban D&D movies. In the first film the main bad guy was a nameless trucker who had a shotgun to stop his CRT TV being stolen. And THIS is where they ended up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
Aren’t these movies about racing...?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
fruit on the bottom posted:Aren’t these movies about racing...? The series moved on from that a while ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Wan is fine, but Justin Lin is the new gold standard of stupid action movies. My favorite thing is that Vin Diesel has a permanent rider in his contracts that says that his character is not allowed to lose any fights, to anyone or anything, including vehicles.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Old Kentucky Shark posted:And also, the book that peeps out between the pages of the book, about a fat incel hiding in an abandoned bus masturbating to visions of Reagan’s America while western civilization collapses around him, would be a really good satire if the author could conceive of it being satirical. This phenomenal observation is not getting its due appreciation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:The series moved on from that a while ago. And it was always a movie about heists, just it used to be stealing CRTs from semis and not global tracking software from the middle east.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
SlimGoodbody posted:This phenomenal observation is not getting its due appreciation. I mean there's nothing more to add to it really, he's absolutely right. A book about people retreating into an online fantasy world where they imagine their knowledge of pop culture trivia makes them special chosen ones while society crumbles around them would be remarkably prescient these days, but RPO takes that premise and instead goes "and isn't this so awesome you guys?"
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
So I'm 45% of the way through the RPO book, according to my mp3 player -- for reference, the non-challenging girl love interest has shown up and also the horrible japanese stereotypes -- and also I skipped ahead to see how it ends, because I am one of those, and I have some thoughts. One is that for all its obsession with pop/nerd culture the book actually has a super-shallow and facile understanding of the elements of that culture. And I'm not talking about how it uses everything uncritically, although it does do that, but about how it gets even regular-degular nuts and bolts poo poo wrong. To take one example, if I can get extremely nerdy for a second here: at one point the main character meets Acererak the Demi-lich, and Acererak offers to shake his hand. The character does so, and then nothing else happens. Two things: Acererak doesn't loving have hands, he's just a floating soul-sucking skull -- that's what the Demi in his name means, he's actually kind of famous for it -- and also, even if he did have hands, you don't shake hands with a lich, because touching a lich is one of the iconicly bad no-nos in D&D. Lichs paralyze anything they touch. The lich's touch is so famously nasty that there's actually a spell called Lich Touch. And, normally, hey, who cares about that poo poo? Demanding slavish attention to nostalgic source material is a good way to ruin a good time. I hate it. But the thing is, slavish devotion to nostalgic source material is literally the entire theme of this book, and it doesn't do it very well, which is weird, right? At first, I thought this was possibly because the author was too young to have been an 80's nerd, and was groping his way to secondhand, unearned nostalgia, which would have explained a lot, but wikipedia says he's 45. So, yeah. Another is that the book is really clumsy with its references. Just obnoxiously clumsy. At one point, I swear to God, there's an actual line of the book that goes "'My God,' I said, 'It's full of stars!' This was a line from the film 2001: A Space Odyssey." Hol-ee poo poo. See, the whole point of a pop culture reference is that it is a popularly shared reference. It lets you invoke shared themes with a minimal expenditure of effort. If you have to explain it, you have already hosed it up; the lack of explanation is the literal point of making a reference. RPO does pop culture references not for any value, but as some kind of tourette's syndrome. I'm a big Kim Newman fan, and Kim Newman's Annodracula series is basically the pop-lit equivalent of Ready Player One, but while Kim Newman drops literary references like they're on clearance at Sears, he at least trusts his audience to either get them or get the gist of them. When Dr. Moreau shows up as a WW1 battlefield surgeon, he doesn't stop the action to say "Dr. Moreau was famously in a book called The Island of Dr Moreau, where he made animal-humans. Marlon Brando played him in the movie." A third thing is that the book is spectacularly bad at judging the moral weight and consequences of actions within its own plot. At one point, when the main character's trailer park blows up, killing his only remaining family and basically every off-line person he knows, the main character is sad... sort of. But when the event is referenced and described numerous times, it's always in the context of an attempt to murder the main character, and not, you know, an act of actual mass murder of friends and neighbors. The main character, and, in fact, all the characters who ever hear about this act, are much more emotionally invested in the corporate baddy guys attempting to cheat at an online game. An online game which is largely pointless and nonviable long term, because, as the author helpfully reminds us about once an hour, the world is in its third decade of economic recession and even McDonald's has a 2 year waiting list for job applicants. In the overall tonal arc, winning the game is treated within the narrative as if it will be a heroic moment that will solve societal ills, because that's what happens in 80's movies when you win the game, but every fact given within the actual story strenuously denies this. The 200 billion dollars that is on the line for winning the game will set the main characters up in comfort for life, and is certainly worth a major corporation killing for, but it's explicitly not enough to even start salving society's wounds or stave off collapse. It's as if the plot of the Hunger Games was actually just about not being hungry. A fourth thing is that the online world of RPO, as described in RPO, is just really loving dull. People have apparently limitless and ubiquitous haptic Virtual Reality, and they use it to lovingly recreate shot-for-shot remakes of 80s movies, and this is treated as an amazing experience and not a totally tedious waste of time*. There is virtually no reference, at any point, to any intellectual property newer than World of Warcraft. Decades into the future, with fantastic new technology, all anyone does is painstakingly recreate the experiences of the world of their childhoods and their parents' childhoods. Even within the stipulated bounds of nostalgia it's loving weak: the characters could be doing anything, like crashing the Millennium Falcon into a Borg Cube, which would at least be kind of exciting, but instead they are painstakingly detailing the workings of TRS-80 cassette tapes. And this is treated as a totally normal and cool thing to do, and not a terrifying glimpse into a level of frozen sociopathy normally reserved for psychiatric textbooks. I said that this book makes every wrong choice, which was a reference to Paul Scheer talking about the Disaster Artist, which was itself a reference to Tommy Wiseau's The Room. Ready Player One is like The Room in that it is very bad, but also in that it's particular flavor badness seems to say more about the author than it does about the work itself. *It's a game literally based on two hours of nonstop rote memorization. Like, Jesus, the book says they later make best-selling games based on this. loving shoot me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 03:23
|
|
|
Clearly you missed a key element of the setting. You know how every dystopian Sci-fi has a what if, what if we ran out of land (Waterworld), gas (Mad max), or sunlight (Matrix)?* RPO what-if presupposed that the entire world population has become autistic. *this is the observation used in an early episode of the popular web series Red Vs Blue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 08:45 |
|
|
I think RP1 would be an Actually Good book if it was presented as a satire and not sincere, considering what I know about it. Like, literally, that one change would save it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 03:33
|
|
