|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:If you kill someone in comicbookland they'll just come back a few months later with a new costume and stronger powers, almost guaranteed. Counter-point:Spider-man's marriage
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 17:42 |
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:He's like the only I guy I like who can criticize the MCU without looking too pompous, though he takes a lot of potshots at the MCU (using them for examples for bad editing and bad cinematography) in his videos for some reason film nerds are really mad that MCU is super popular and making All Of The Money.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
Other posted:Counter-point:Spider-man's marriage Just wait, I bet someone cloned his marriage
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
It would be cool and good if there was just an internal memo at Marvel/DC that said "we're doing a soft line reboot in seven years. Until then, if you kill or maim somebody, they stay that way!" Some raised stakes and actual threat of mortal harm would do wonders for adding some pizazz to the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
what if you took a superhero like 'ant man' and had him team up with a superhero like 'aqua man' i bet it might look something.... like this 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Prokhor Zakharov posted:film nerds are really mad that MCU is super popular and making All Of The Money. I don't think they are actually.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
As someone who grew up in an age where "comic book movie" meant something like Steel, The Phantom or Batman and Robin I don't get anyone being mad at the MCU.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:As someone who grew up in an age where "comic book movie" meant something like Steel, The Phantom or Batman and Robin I don't get anyone being mad at the MCU. Yeah, the only people mad about Marvel seem to be concentrated in CineD. Normal (heh) film nerds usually seem to consider the MCU to be fun and competent though also fluffy and mostly safe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:As someone who grew up in an age where "comic book movie" meant something like Steel, The Phantom or Batman and Robin I don't get anyone being mad at the MCU. Literal children who don't know how bad it used to be, and film snobs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:As someone who grew up in an age where "comic book movie" meant something like Steel, The Phantom or Batman and Robin I don't get anyone being mad at the MCU. The mid 90s were a dark time for superhero movies.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_superhero_films
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
I tried having an actual conversation in cined but it went nowhere. maybe you guys can chime in on a good direction to take this: My entire state of consciousness has been preoccupied with how to create a gritty live action Freakazoid for the past 48 hours. all spare mental resources get devoted to this task. Like maybe he gets infected by all social media so he's like a tumblr hitler social justice 9/11 parody video loving guy. Basically the embodiment of that prodromal schizophrenia post from fyad, but with a heart of gold. But how do you make that palatable to the mainstream? Or do you Deadpool it, and let some youtube guy go nuts with 50 mil? No because DC would ever allow an entire film to be made without the fingerprints of middle management all over it. So he's cruising the """""dark web"""" searching out the dankest memes that havent caught on w/the mainstream internet yet, trump pepes back in 2014, new spurdos. But Zod takes over every screen on Earth doing his big speech when he calls out Kal El, and The guy gets caught in the deep cyber and transformed into Freakazoid. So the movie can start with a big white title screen: 9/11 x 1000 - THE WORLD IS INTRODUCED TO THE FREAKAZOID since it all takes place during the Metropolis destruction. Just trying to nail down any sort of tone at all is an exercise in frustration. Mentally draining. I will figure it out though. What do u think? I think figuring out Freakazoid and how he works into the DCU will have a ripple effect for all their other properties. He is important, maybe the most important.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UCSfRQ1ymM
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
bring back old gbs posted:gritty live action Freakazoid You dope, Freakazoid is part of the Animaniacs shared universe https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NLrjVnMO7k
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:You dope, Freakazoid is part of the Animaniacs shared universe Well you can't just have Animaniacs start showing up in Aquaman without establishing a wackier new direction. You dip your toe. That's why Freakazoid is the lynchpin of the entire extended universe, he bridges both worlds. Handle that correctly and Pesto Bobby and Squid can start working with Luthor to genocide the Hawk People and nobody will question it. Of course, you're thinking, how could Chicken Boo sit out an entire war against the Hawk People? He. Doesn't. CHICKEN BOO is... CROSSROADS. IN THEATRES 2022 bring back old gbs fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Sep 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
I used to chat with SMG on Messenger all the time and I promise you he's the exact same person off-site as on. Eventually he decided he just wanted to talk about how The Thing remake, Wrath of the Titans, Skyline and Battlefield LA were the greatest movies of the 21st Century. Like, he wouldn't stop talking about those 4 awful films. I think he blocked me when I wouldn't agree with him and wanted to talk about something other than terrible movies (I'd just had a baby). He's a genuinely interesting guy but yeah, hosed up and doesn't really understand things that involve human emotions. Spermanent Record fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Sep 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
frozenpeas posted:I used to chat with SMG on Messenger all the time and I promise you he's the exact same person off-site as on.. Oh yeah that was obvious. Anyone who says he's a gimmick needs to consider how likely it is that someone either has that much time and brainpower to devote to lateral autistic thinking for years on end with no presumable reimbursement, versus living in that headspace naturally. bring back old gbs posted:Well you can't just have Animaniacs start showing up in Aquaman without establishing a wackier new direction. You dip your toe. That's why Freakazoid is the lynchpin of the entire extended universe, he bridges both worlds. Handle that correctly and Pesto Bobby and Squid can start working with Luthor to genocide the Hawk People and nobody will question it. Of course, you're thinking, how could Chicken Boo sit out an entire war against the Hawk People? He. Doesn't. Well you've got me more interested than anything the WB/DC is actually doing, so
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
frozenpeas posted:I used to chat with SMG on Messenger all the time and I promise you he's the exact same person off-site as on. The 80s carpenter remake? Or you mean the 'prequel' remake of Carpenter's remake?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
21st Century, so the "prequel/remake"
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:The 80s carpenter remake? Or you mean the 'prequel' remake of Carpenter's remake? Carpenter's film wasn't a remake of The Thing From Another World, it was a more faithful version of Who Goes There? updated to modern times. But that's beside the point, if someone's honestly defending that lovely CGI'd remake, they are worse than Hitler.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
Sunswipe posted:But that's beside the point, if someone's honestly defending that lovely CGI'd remake, they are worse than Hitler. Which Hitler??? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
Chip Hitler.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Which Hitler??? Every family has a black sheep, ok? Even I can admit that great uncle Addy was... a bit naughty. Let's just accept that and move on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Sunswipe posted:Carpenter's film wasn't a remake of The Thing From Another World, it was a more faithful version of Who Goes There? updated to modern times. But that's beside the point, if someone's honestly defending that lovely CGI'd remake, they are worse than Hitler. I'll defend the prequel.  The CGI is sometimes questionable but largely inoffensive, and it's more clever than people give it credit for, especially on a follow-up viewing where you know who's a Thing and you can see it getting all of its "chess pieces" and contingency plans in place at the start of the movie, and then watching how its attempts to escape or infect everyone play out. The movie is hamstrung by severe studio meddling which is most apparent once the characters enter the crashed spaceship at the end, but by and large it's a perfectly fine prequel to the Carpenter movie. And I absolutely love the Carpenter movie, it's my #2 movie of all time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
I don't hate the prequel on the grounds that the 1982 version is sacred, I think it's 100% superfluous. While the finished 2011 film isn't a trainwreck it does nothing to disabuse the notion that its 100% superfluous. I'm sure SMG has some weird interpretation where it's about Zimbabwe religion that totally justifies its existence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
I can agree that it doesn't NEED to exist, but I really, really like the Thing as a movie monster (visually, conceptually, the works - I think it's more interesting to think and talk about than the Xenomorph, and this is me talking) so getting to see it run amok on the big screen in a new movie put a big smile on my face.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
I respect that and on-paper don't disagree, but from my memory I just plain didn't see anything new or interesting about The Thing's behavior in the 2011 movie. I'd like to be wrong though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:I don't hate the prequel on the grounds that the 1982 version is sacred, I think it's 100% superfluous. While the finished 2011 film isn't a trainwreck it does nothing to disabuse the notion that its 100% superfluous. I'm sure SMG has some weird interpretation where it's about Zimbabwe religion that totally justifies its existence. Pretty much this. I'd rather they'd done a big screen re-release of the original than this totally unneeded prequel/remake.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:I respect that and on-paper don't disagree, but from my memory I just plain didn't see anything new or interesting about The Thing's behavior in the 2011 movie. I'd like to be wrong though. Mostly you see the Thing reacting to a new species it knows nothing about (humans), and you see it try a bunch of different tactics to see what works. Unlike the first movie where people get infected over the course of the movie, the 2011 Thing infects all of its victims very early in the movie and then uses each of them in different ways. One tries to escape via helicopter, one tries brute force, one tries an ambush, and one just sits and waits as a contingency plan in case the others fail. I've been giving serious thought to doing an effort-thread about the Carpenter movie (and the prequel) just because I love the Carpenter movie to death. I'm not sure if I'm better off posting it in CineD or GBS though. Like, I don't want the thread to be clogged with fart-sniffing Zizek metatextual bullshit, but I also don't want it to be non-stop threadshitting and/or just an endless chorus of people high-fiving each other over how awesome the Carpenter movie is and nothing more.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:Mostly you see the Thing reacting to a new species it knows nothing about (humans), and you see it try a bunch of different tactics to see what works. Unlike the first movie where people get infected over the course of the movie, the 2011 Thing infects all of its victims very early in the movie and then uses each of them in different ways. One tries to escape via helicopter, one tries brute force, one tries an ambush, and one just sits and waits as a contingency plan in case the others fail. It's kind of poetic that the thread is doomed to be slowly infested and devoured wherever you put it and there's not a drat thing you can do to stop the horror other than burning the entire thing down to the ground.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
I didn't care for the Thing prequel. Apart from the bad design of the Things in the movie, it just wasn't very interesting. It wasn't very scary or suspensful and it had none of the atmosphere of the original
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:I didn't care for the Thing prequel. Apart from the bad design of the Things in the movie, it just wasn't very interesting. It wasn't very scary or suspensful and it had none of the atmosphere of the original also the test for thing disease in the renmake prequel was so boring and only done bcz there was a test in teh first one why bother making that scene if youre idea of suspense is open your mouth
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:Mostly you see the Thing reacting to a new species it knows nothing about (humans), and you see it try a bunch of different tactics to see what works. Unlike the first movie where people get infected over the course of the movie, the 2011 Thing infects all of its victims very early in the movie and then uses each of them in different ways. One tries to escape via helicopter, one tries brute force, one tries an ambush, and one just sits and waits as a contingency plan in case the others fail. I get what you mean. It really didn't register to me because it was still the same basic narrative beats in a very similar setting with very similar characters. That's what makes it a bad movie in my opinion-- I was too disinterested by the mediocrity of everything else to even care. Madcosby posted:also the test for thing disease in the renmake prequel was so boring and only done bcz there was a test in teh first one Or the axe "leave it in"... I mean really that's not some brilliant metatextual joke about bad remakes. It's bad writing. I could write why but I'm not getting paid to.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
thing prequel sucked because it did that thing where the writing is written in a certain way to lead you to certain conclusions and then SURPRISE! it's actually the OPPOSITE of what you were thinking was about to happen! but then what happens doesn't make any sense given what you've been seeing and is just a piss poor excuse for the writers to "subvert your expectations!" that helicopter scene is a prime example.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
The Thing prequel had female characters and thus is automatically inferior. Sorry ladies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Pitdragon posted:thing prequel sucked because it did that thing where the writing is written in a certain way to lead you to certain conclusions and then SURPRISE! it's actually the OPPOSITE of what you were thinking was about to happen! but then what happens doesn't make any sense given what you've been seeing and is just a piss poor excuse for the writers to "subvert your expectations!" The prequel shot itself in the foot by showing every Thing reveal in the trailers. Like, who thought that was a good idea? Madcosby posted:also the test for thing disease in the renmake prequel was so boring and only done bcz there was a test in teh first one Like yeah, the scene isn't as good as the absolutely goddamn perfect blood test scene from the Carpenter movie, but I thought it was a fine substitute that's different enough from the blood test scene. Like, maybe people would have liked it more if there had been a violent "payoff" where someone did get wrecked while looking inside someone's mouth?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:I dunno man, would you be willing to put your face right up next to someone's mouth if there's a very real possibility that their head could split open and they could transform into a fanged tentacle monster? Now you know what I feel like all the time
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
ALL THE TIME
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
some of the time?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:I dunno man, would you be willing to put your face right up next to someone's mouth if there's a very real possibility that their head could split open and they could transform into a fanged tentacle monster? I've seen and read "Parasyte". I ain't going to risk it. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 17:42 |
|
|
Young Freud posted:I've seen and read "Parasyte". I ain't going to risk it. That's...does that dude cut thick sheets of steel with his jaws for a day job? That's a very clean decapitation, considering the angle and the toothy maw involved. poo poo didn't even tear, just a clean fuckin cut. I wouldn't even be scared if I saw that, I'd just be like, "what the gently caress Phil? We talked about this! You have the bite strength of heavy duty industrial equipment so you got to remember to take it easy! What is this now, the third girl you've tried to make out with and WHOOPSIE NO HEAD? Don't even give me that 'I was nervous because of my fear of intimacy' bullshit. Your father left your mother and your mother died on you, grow up and get over it. Next time you're cleaning this up yourself. Now get me a beer and a bunch of garbage bags, ya lovable oval office!."
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 22:28
|
|