|
But now that Star Wars belongs to Disney and the opening crawl is such an iconic part of the structure, there's no reason Spielberg wouldn't be able to do a movie now. No one in their right mind would mess with the opening crawl (LOL Rogue One).
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
Maybe Spielberg wouldn't do it out of respect for his retarded cousin George.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
9/11! Like you've never seen it before.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:Also you say whie nerd teenage boy power fantasy, but the guy who wrote it was like mid-30s when he wrote it. Chronologically he was, sure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
they found a way to make the audience cheer at the end of a 9/11 movie kill Charlie Sheen
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
dont feel that movie 43 has the legs to be a full spin off
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
Wow, Charlie Sheen looks like death.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
priznat posted:Agreed, with a sequel that is just as good imo. 2 was way better since they cut out that pointless FBI agent who was the audience stand-in for meeting the characters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
SeANMcBAY posted:Why would they cast Charlie Sheen in a 9/11 movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I was digging through videos and re-discovered this one chain wallet spotted on Jay
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 01:57
|
|
|
There was already a patriotic 9/11 movie called world trade center and it sucked too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
The movie needs to end with Whoopi Goldberg talking to someone on a cell phone. "Yes it's been done, Mr. Bin Laden" *closes flip phone*
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
I wonder why we don't get more "fictional" World War 2 movies. The last two of any note outside of superheroes were Inglourious Basterds and Fury. Almost every other WW2 film I've seen since are docudramas or full on historical films based on "real" events.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 02:17
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:I wonder why we don't get more "fictional" World War 2 movies. The last two of any note outside of superheroes were Inglourious Basterds and Fury. Almost every other WW2 film I've seen since are docudramas or full on historical films based on "real" events. Have there been that many World War II movies in the last decade or two though? Inglorious Basterds is definitely a much more fictional movie than Fury, which is kind of based on the book Death Traps IIRC. But there's also Saving Private Ryan and poo poo. Anyway, you can't do much better than Kelly's Heroes, I think. Especially for the more light hearted thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tomO-X-X5Ak Having a pretty wide variety of feelings 
Captain Lavender fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Jul 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
not sure i'm comfortable with a reality where rich evans has talent and success
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
Captain Lavender posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tomO-X-X5Ak i want to be a cock holster for rich evans
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:Have there been that many World War II movies in the last decade or two though? Inglorious Basterds is definitely a much more fictional movie than Fury, which is kind of based on the book Death Traps IIRC. But there's also Saving Private Ryan and poo poo. I can think of plenty of films. Russian films tend to do more fictional stuff though, like their rendition of Stalingrad, or the movie White Tiger. But most hollywood fare is historical in nature. You've got Flags of Our Fathers, Letters from Iwo Jima, the Great Raid, Defiance, Valkyrie, Windtalkers, Red Tails (reeaaaally stretching the historical aspect), Hacksaw Ridge, to name a few. Basterds and Fury are much more fictionalized than the other films on the list. Basterds goes all out alternate history, while Fury was one of the most savage takedowns of the patriotic nonsense that infests the majority of WW2 movies. But Kelly's Heroes is still the best. A western in WW2 starring Clint Eastwood. There is nothing wrong with any of that. Hollywood focuses on either a specific event or personality, rather than a nebulous idea of "the war" as a means of telling an original story. And getting hung up on authenticity and accuracy, a lot of these movies can be super dry as a result. Arc Hammer fucked around with this message at 03:01 on Jul 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:I can think of plenty of films. Russian films tend to do more fictional stuff though, like their rendition of Stalingrad, or the movie White Tiger. But most hollywood fare is historical in nature. You've got Flags of Our Fathers, Letters from Iwo Jima, the Great Raid, Defiance, Valkyrie, Windtalkers, Red Tails (reeaaaally stretching the historical aspect), Hacksaw Ridge, to name a few. i sorta liked fury, though i laughed my rear end off when they kept trying to paint the southern wannbe rapist tank crewmen as a really ok guy, then he got a panzerfaust through the side. any movie that has nazis getting blown to paste is ok by my standards. that said i prefer basterds. hacksaw ridge was pretty good as was letters from iwo jima. the only ww2 movie i ever hated was pearl harbor. pretty much. i tried reading the book once. but its just reference after reference and its never funny or clever. reference stuff works rarely and only if it actually fits or is funny or its subconscious. like tarantino movies do referance stuff, but its part of the conversation or its some obscure poo poo. SeANMcBAY posted:Why would they cast Charlie Sheen in a 9/11 movie. why are they making it about a bunch of fictional people trapped on a elevator in 9/11, plus the elevator were loving gone when the plane hit, it loving incinerated the shafts on impact.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:I can think of plenty of films. Russian films tend to do more fictional stuff though, like their rendition of Stalingrad, or the movie White Tiger. But most hollywood fare is historical in nature. You've got Flags of Our Fathers, Letters from Iwo Jima, the Great Raid, Defiance, Valkyrie, Windtalkers, Red Tails (reeaaaally stretching the historical aspect), Hacksaw Ridge, to name a few. Fun fact about Kelly's Heroes: It was one of the first WW2 movies that actually put some effort into getting the vehicles to look like the real thing (at least when it comes to movies that came out some time after the war). With German tanks it may even have been the first, since there weren't that many left in working order after the war. They filmed in Yugoslavia and used the Yugoslav armies Shermans, and they used their T-34s to make a mock Tiger that actually looks pretty good (Saving Private Ryan also used T-34s for its Tigers I think). That is pretty different for movies like Patton which just used Patton tanks for everything (which is kind of funny), green for Americans and grey for Germans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
priznat posted:(Unrelated) AIDS and 9/11 together at last. Just missing some Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:why are they making it about a bunch of fictional people trapped on a elevator in 9/11, plus the elevator were loving gone when the plane hit, it loving incinerated the shafts on impact. jet fuel cant melt Charlie Sheens
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
client posted:jet fuel cant melt Charlie Sheens 
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
The only trailers before Dunkirk was the latest Blade Runner sequel one (which is really hard to watch after the Rich Evans version) and Justice League. Warner Brothers, thanks for reminding me that most of your movies are poo poo. Also Dunkirk is pretty good and you should go see it in the theater. I'm not sure 70mm is a necessity though, I'm kind of glad I did but it wasn't worth going out of my way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
Captain Lavender posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tomO-X-X5Ak The video starts with Rich firing his Nukie Lazer. What even is reality any more? Also Rich is a good voice actor, who'dathunk?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
King Vidiot posted:The video starts with Rich firing his Nukie Lazer. What even is reality any more? He can play a smug, pedantic, irritable nerd, who'dathunk.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:That would be for Empire. Irvin Kershner did the film on the grounds that the words "An Irvin Kershner Film" would come before the opening credits. Well that didn't happen, so the Director's Guild fined Lucas for breaking his deal with Kershner, and Lucas quit the guild. Maybe it's a little of both. Lucas got fined for the lack of opening credits in A New Hope. quote:The Directors Guild of America fined Lucas for refusing to have a standard title sequence in his Star Wars films. After paying the fine, he quit the guild. This made it hard for him to find a director for some of his later projects. According to some, he wanted his friend Spielberg to direct some of the later Star Wars movies, but as a member of the guild Spielberg may have been unable to do so. Spielberg has repeatedly stated that Lucas consciously did not let him direct any Star Wars films, despite the fact that Spielberg wanted to. Other directors Lucas pursued to aid him were David Lynch and David Cronenberg, both of whom declined. But he finally quit the DGA and WGA in 1981 after he was fined again for ESB. quote:In 1981, Lucas cited “personal reasons” for withdrawing from the Directors Guild of America and the Writers Guild of America. An April 6, 1981, Variety banner story read “Lucas Severs Last H’wood Ties” (though Lucasfilm remained a signatory to both). Lucas was unhappy with the DGA, which had fined him because Irvin Kershner’s director credit was at the end of “The Empire Strikes Back” instead of at the beginning of the film, as the DGA contract specified. Lucas wanted to thrust the audience immediately into the action, and Kershner was OK with the end-credit placement. From the NY Times quote:His resignation from the Directors Guild came because the guild fined him for placing the director's credit at the end of "The Empire Strikes Back," even though Irvin Kershner, the director he had chosen for "Empire," did not object. For "The Revenge of the Jedi," the third "Star Wars" movie, which begins production next Jan. 13 in England, he has selected a little-known English director, Richard Marquand, who does not belong to the American guild.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 05:30
|
|
|
If you want some WW2 era semi fictional stuff I really recommend the gently caress out of Manhattan. Both seasons were excellent... all 7 of us who actually watched the show agree  Why WGN of all networks spent a ton of money on this project will forever remain a mystery, but I'm glad they did. It's not actual combat stuff though, it takes place almost entirely in New Mexico.Opening credits https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fV5WNudPPU
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 06:25
|
|
|
counterfeitsaint posted:
Not originally in the comics. He originally had a boner for a lady in a black dress and a skullface.. But they haven't introduced her in any of the movies so it's probably gonna be Hela plus they recently hooked up in the comics too :  Thanos fetish is basically death gods
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 07:27
|
|
|
Who could say no to those sexy deer antlers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 07:29
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:Not originally in the comics. He originally had a boner for a lady in a black dress and a skullface.. But they haven't introduced her in any of the movies so it's probably gonna be Hela Like Hel, ruler of the underworld? They added the -a so that they didn't literally have a character named "hell"?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 07:30
|
|
|
priznat posted:Agreed, with a sequel that is just as good imo. I thought the second one was a lot better. It had some really neat character designs instead of the boring '04 CGI monster from the first. Shame they didn't do more of those movies. So much weird poo poo happens in the comics, there's no shortage of material. I'd happily watch red Ron Perlman punch floating nazi heads and various folktale creatures.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
i would like mike to analyze the new star trek series trailer and end the video by putting a gun in his mouth
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 09:51
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:Like Hel, ruler of the underworld? They added the -a so that they didn't literally have a character named "hell"? Yup. Actual mythology has to be made safe for christians so that they too can enjoy comic books/movies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 10:37
|
|
|
Clawtopsy posted:i would like mike to analyze the new star trek series trailer and end the video by putting a gun in his mouth Why would he kill himself? He'll have a whole new source of forced references.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 11:48
|
|
|
There's a new star trek?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 11:49
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:There's a new star trek? Yeah, they're taking another stab at Enterprise's premise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
Jonas Albrecht posted:Yeah, they're taking another stab at Enterprise's premise. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 11:54
|
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Discovery
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 11:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
This ones got KLINGONS. And PHASERS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 11:57
|
|
