|
my mom didn't realize that Tarkin was CGI. She's kinda stupid, though
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 09:54 |
|
|
That's a good and funny video and I even liked the movie RLM are good and I know this is the internet but I think it's good to try and not get butthurt whenever you disagree with someone
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
Loden Taylor posted:Tarkin didn't look bad, he just didn't look real. Like, if this had been a completely CGI movie, I would have thought "wow, that's amazing, they've really come a long way with animating people." Putting him next to real live people made me think "holy christ, that was a bad idea." Agreed. Yeah, he looked like a video game, but he looked like a really, really good one. Like, a Playstation 6 or something. I didn't even get a creepy uncanny valley vibe from it, it was that good. But like I said, he kinda felt like a cartoon and having him there right next to live actors made it feel like Who Framed Roger Rabbit. If he was in a fully animated movie, he'd be fine. Honestly, it just makes me kinda want them to make a couple Star Wars animated movies that are made for TV or something and are in the Clone Wars \ Rebels style, but just with characters like Luke, Han and Leia. Like, maybe do loose adaptations of Shadows of the Empire, the Thrawn trilogy and the X-Wing books, but updated to fit into the new continuity. Those and KOTOR are like the only good EU stories worth keeping anyway. They already have Thrawn in Rebels and there's a 30 year gap between episodes 6 and 7, so I'm sure you could fit something in there.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
I think that podcast video is loving incredible. And I even liked rogue one because I'm precisely the kinda sperg who is into how many rivets are on a TIE Bomber. I eat that poo poo up. I kinda feel like we need people like RLM to mock youtube trends and geek culture poo poo, because God so much of it is so cringeworthy and needs to be taken down a peg. Jay, Mike, Rich and the gang are doing God's work.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
loot crate really is the dumbest poo poo imaginable. "oh gee, it's a box full of random poo poo I don't want that no one else will want either." That, and I don't even really particularly care for everything that's popular right now. I haven't seen a single episode of game of thrones, I'm sick of superhero poo poo and I think doctor who is a load of fuckin' garbage. I'm not into harry potter because I don't have a vagina. That, and I have so much nerd poo poo, sometimes I have trouble getting rid of it. I'm already drowning in cheaply made memorabilia. I suspect that the people who get stuff like loot crate are new to this whole thing and want to have a bunch of worthless poo poo too so they can be "cool". Oh hey, I have a Thanos (TM) Infinity Gauntlet (TM) oven mitt! Awesome, right? edit: I forgot, I wasn't be obnoxious enough, I meant AWESOMESAUCE instead of awesome
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
My favorite part about the 2016 Ghostbusters movie is when Dan Akyroyd said that Paul Fieg will never be allowed on the Sony Pictures lot ever again
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
It was also really cool how Sony said that everyone who didn't like the new Ghostbusters was a misogynistic basement dweller. That really made me want to go see it. Trying to shame people into the theater doesn't really work. At least it's convenient to think that your critics are the scum of the earth when they don't like the smell of your farts so you never have to do any self-reflection These been some rumblings about CBS trying to use the same excuse for Star Trek Discovery but that one isn't going to fool anyone because Star Trek has always been diverse, we've had a black captain and a woman captain before, and the show with the black guy was in fact the best one. No, I just don't like it how Star Trek Discovery looks like a dark and gritty Mass Effect and how the main character is Spock's adopted human sister who we have never heard of until now and that's super dumb Fabricated posted:Ghostbusters 2016 is only really worth talking about in reference to how insanely mad people got online about it for whatever reasons. Yeah honestly the movie itself just isn't worth talking about and just isn't really all that interesting. Now the huge shitstorm surrounding the movie, that I find really fascinating. It will be remembered for that and not for the movie itself which is just forgettable GET IN THE ROBOT fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Aug 9, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:What the deal with Michelle Yeoh in STD? She is barely in the trailer while the black chick looks like she is being groomed to take the captain's chair then they kill Yeoh in some sort of half done stunt casting. I dunno. I'm guessing Michelle Yeoh is the Captain, then she gets killed, then Sonequa Martin who is Spock's adopted sister becomes captain and then she flies off the handle and fucks up and starts a war with the Klingons. That's what the trailer looks like to me. I could forgive them just inventing a human stepsister for Spock even though it screams fanfic poo poo, but the whole tone of the thing is just so.... off. Star Trek is fun and goofy and while tackling social issues is literally what the show is all about, it does it in a way that's optimistic and not depressing. Discovery just looks like it takes itself completely seriously and is all dark and gritty. Rumor has it that it's going to have plenty of gore, death and naughty swear words and while I'm no prude and I in fact love all of those things, seeing them in Star Trek is just like... wrong Star Trek Generations was a lovely movie but the scene where Data says "oh poo poo" is funny and played for laughs precisely because nobody ever swears in Star Trek
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
Blue Star posted:i could never get into STar Trek. I've watched some episodes of the original tv show with William SHatner and enjoyed a few of them, but a lot of them are boring. And when I tried to get into the other Star Treks, they were too boring too. It's super not for everyone. My favorite movies from the past 10 years or so are science fiction movies that aren't sequels or remakes of anything and don't have any action or anything exploding in them at all. Arrival is a movie that's just about Amy Adams trying to talk to these weird rear end aliens and there's no fight scenes at all and it's great and I loved it It's also why Star Trek doesn't really work well as a big budget Hollywood movie because some of the best episodes are just the crew sitting around a table trying to figure out how to solve an ethical problem
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
Overacting is a longstanding Star Trek tradition and Avery Brooks arguably chews the scenery more than Willam Shatner himself, and Bill Shatner practically invented chewing the scenery One of my favorite scenes in DS9 is when Sisko was like "IT WAS REAL! I INVENTED IT! IN MY MIND! AND IT WAS REAAAALLL" It's supposed to be a really dramatic scene but I can't help but find it hilarious. DS9 was the darkest Star Trek show and had the darkest subject matter, but it handled it in such a way that it still felt very much like Star Trek. And when she show actually did humor on purpose it was genuinely funny. It's all about tone.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Honestly the answer to the whole Ghostbusters debacle doesn't take a genius to figure out. Ultimately the problem with the Ghostbusters remake... is that it's a Ghostbusters remake. The original movie is such a classic that no matter how hard you try and how good of a job you do, people are always going to compare it to the original and it just won't fare well because the original is so beloved. I don't care who you cast, who writes or directs it, or oh god, what gender the Ghostbusters are, making it in the first place is just setting yourself up for failure. I'm sure a lot of people will disagree, but an all-female Ghostbusters team was actually a good idea because then you have an excuse for when it inevitably bombs. And you know what? Paul Fieg and the actresses from the movie have actually done good stuff in the past. I enjoyed Bridesmaids. But it's also a totally different style of humor. Ghostbusters was extremely dry and witty whereas Paul Fieg's wheelhouse is toilet humor. Bridesmaids was funny but Ghostbusters it was not and I dunno what the hell they were thinking aside from dollar signs. Probably nothing beyond the dollar signs, really. If the 2016 Ghostbusters was its own movie and didn't try to be Ghostbusters, people probably would have generally liked it. Remaking Ghostbusters is like remaking Back to the Future, the Godfather or Jaws. You do it and people will revolt. They kind of got away with remaking Star Wars and Jurassic Park because they pretended those remakes were sequels. And that said, the Force Awakens was mediocre and holy gently caress was Jurassic World bad.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
The thing that I keep hearing about the female cast that's strikes me as so weird is that people keep saying "it's so little girls can have role models." Wait, what? Since when were the Ghostbusters role models for anyone? Peter Venkman was a creep and a conman, Ray was a manchild, Egon was an emotionless weirdo and all of them were just in it for the money. Winston was probably the only decent human being in the crew and he was still just in it for the money. They didn't bust ghosts out of the kindness of their hearts, they just wanted fame, fortune and pussy. And then if you look at the new Ghostbusters, I wouldn't want my daughter to look at it and go "I want to be like one of those people!" either. Yug posted:So far the spin offs have been better than the direct sequels. But the next spin off and sequel both look really bad. Yeah I've read some leaks for the plot of Episode 8 and heard about the poo poo going on with Han Solo and hooooooo boy Disney Star Wars might actually be worse than the prequels and the old EU. I thought it was great that they hit the reset button but boy was I wrong WampaLord posted:It's this. No matter how good the script, nothing would have saved it from comparison to the original, and the original is literally a perfect movie. Yep. It is. Ghostbusters was catching lightning in a bottle and it doesn't strike in the same place twice. Back to the Future is another perfect movie and thankfully Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale fight tooth and nail to prevent another movie from ever happening and it won't happen until they're both dead. A remake of Ghostbusters should have never been made, and if there were ever going to do Ghostbusters 3, they should have made it in the late 90s or maybe even the early 2000s at the very, very latest.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
KakerMix posted:I wonder if this attempt at a Ghost Busters cinematic universe (lol) has negatively impacted proton pack Halloween costumes It's almost like today movies are completely disposable, are immediately forgotten, never leave a lasting impression and ape older, better movies for brand recognition so they make money
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Power_of_the_glory posted:I kind of vowed to never watch Ghostbusters 2016 after they attacked James Rolfe for not wanting to watch the movie. Same. I thought an all girl Ghostbusters might be interesting until I actually saw the trailer and how people started making GBS threads on James Rolfe and I was like "okay, no thanks, gently caress you" Like I said, an all girls Ghostbusters was actually genius and one of the only smart moves they made with this movie because then when it fails you have a convinient excuse
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:I mean, you know that's their job right? Yeah it was a pretty insane mic drop moment. It probably wouldn't have happened if Feig's career wasn't already ruined. Akroyd has also been in the business for a long, long time and has a good enough reputation to get away with it. More or less Ghostbusters destroyed Paul Fieg's career and Sony Pictures' days are numbered, too. Rumor has it Sony might sell it to Disney so I guess Disney will get the rights to Spider-Man fully back at least. Not that I'm wild about Disney, given that they're more like a factory that mass produces soulless Marvel movies, Star Wars movies and live action remakes of animated movies.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:You know across every Star War movie we've never seen a Star Destroyer fully engaged in combat. We do in Return of the Jedi and Revenge of the Sith It really bugged me how lovely the space battles were in the Force Awakens compared to earlier movies. Okay, so you have this huge Death Star made out of the side of the planet and it's only defended by like 10 TIE Fighters? At least the battle in Rogue One was cool as gently caress even though the rest of the movie wasn't that good. We at least got a very cool space battle out of it Very cool. Very cool. Me personally,
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
Fabricated posted:I had always wondered why Back to the Future hadn't gotten rebooted. Who owns the actual movie rights still? It's because Rob Zemeckis and Bob Gale still have the rights to the movie and have fought tooth and nail against a remake and one won't be made until they're both dead. Unfortunately this means when they eventually do die some jackass in Hollywood will probably make a remake
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
priznat posted:I watched BttF for the first time in forever and it holds up although it is a bit rapey. Marty wasn't going to sexually assault his mom... his mom was sexually assaulting him. Biff was a full on rapist though so when you think about it, it's really loving weird that they just let the guy who was going to rape Marty's mom wash their car and do their chores many years later Like goddamn it McFly he almost raped your wife 30 years ago why are you allowing him anywhere near your home
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Like seriously Hollywood quit it with the remakes goddamn. There's been hundreds of remakes over the years and I'd be hard pressed to name 10 of them that were actually worth watching and weren't immediately forgotten. -The Thing (the 80s one) -The Fly (also from the 80s) -Scarface -Little Shop of Horrors -True Grit -Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid -Hammer Dracula and Francis Ford Coppola Dracula I guess? -I'm drawing a blank The Magnificent Seven, A Fistful of Dollars and Star Wars are all debatable becuase they were all based on Akira Kurosawa films but changed the setting so it's a bit of a stretch. I like Mad Max Fury Road and Shin Godzilla a lot but to they count? I dunno, calling them remakes is also a bit of a stretch. Also notice that half of those movies I listed were westerns. Oh and they remade the Magnificent Seven again, didn't they? I forgot about that. Like you know, most remakes.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
starkebn posted:I think it's pretty simple: That's not entirely true. You can also remake old movies that people forgot. I mean yeah old people remember plenty of John Wayne movies but kids sure don't. Like the trick to doing a remake is not have people realize it's a remake. You know, like the Thing. The 80s one. Or Ben-Hur. Also no, not the new one, the 1950's one. I also really liked Dredd, but again, it isn't quite a remake even though there was a Judge Dredd movie before. It's another adaptation of the source material, especially if the movie before deviated from it a lot. For the same reason, I dunno if you can consider the various Dracula and Frankenstein movies "remakes" as they're adaptions of the books, not the movies from the 1930s everyone knows. Well, except these new ones are based on the universal movies. And they're being done by Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman. I swear it's almost like those two guys are on a mission to destroy everything I love
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Apparently there's a new dune in the works. I like Denis Villeneuve's work but I'm worried for his future career if the new blade runner is poo poo they may axe Dune. I'm not super optimistic about Dune because while I like the book a lot, and I even like the David Lynch movie, the book is really loving weird and long and might be unfilmable as they say. I feel like Dune could work as a HBO series like Game of Thrones but making it into a two hour movie that average moviegoers will actually like would be a huge challenge. Like the David Lynch movie makes no sense and it's hard to enjoy or understand the context of everything without reading the book. Yes, I know it's a David Lynch movie and they never make sense but you get what I'm saying right? I can almost garuntee that the Dune remake will flop hard, average people will see it and say "what in the gently caress is this" and the only people who might actually like it are turbo nerds posting on internet forums like us
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:Just like on first attempts, when a re-do adaptation of a book goes closer to the source material, it gets better. I mean if you can tell from that thread I posted I'm a dinosaur nut and unsurprisingly Jurassic Park is one of my favorite movies. It's a classic but I've often wondered what it would be like if they made a new one that was closer to the book and had more up to date science. The biggest difference between the book and the movie is that in the movie, cloning dinosaurs seems fine and things only went bad because they didn't pay Newman from Seinfeld enough money. In the book they really go into just how hosed up and unethical it is to clone dinosaurs and how John Hammond has very little understanding of the animals and how to care for them or keep them under control. They only touch on that very briefly in the movie. In the book, many of the dinosaurs don't come out right and die, and they have version numbers like software which is messed up, and many of them even have difficulty breathing because they're too big for today's atmosphere. I mean nowadays we know you can't clone dinosaurs because the DNA is all gone but in the next couple decades we'll probably be able to reverse engineer birds into dinosaurs because their dinosaur genes are actually still there but turned off. But I'd let that slide and say you could clone them as long as they have feathers, T-Rex can see you standing still and they call the Raptors Utahraptors instead. At least the original Jurassic Park was pretty accurate for what we knew about dinosaurs in 1993 but they never updated them and Jurassic World makes the original look realistic by today's standards. I mean the freaking mosasaur was the size of a blue whale in it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:If you edit out Keanu Reeves then Dracula is one of the best movies ever. I dunno if I would go that far but it's definitely a pretty decent movie and definitely one of the best Dracula movies. For me its probably a toss up between that one, the 1930s one and Nosferatu. It's hard to beat those first two as they're so iconic, although the Francis Ford Coppala one is a little closer to the book. I'm more of a Frankenstein guy personally. Out of my top 10 favorite movies ever, two of them are Frankenstein movies - the Bride of Frankenstein and Young Frankenstein. Dr. Pretorious in Bride is loving amazing and steals the show and Mel Brooks needs no introduction. I've only met one person who hated Mel Brooks and if you don't like Mel Brooks then gently caress you. How can anyone not love Mel Brooks?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Two remakes? Disgusting. Obviously the 1910 Frankenstein was good enough; Hollywood should have just moved on to new ideas. Shut up dumbass, I'm not saying all remakes are bad. Also Bride of Frankenstein is a sequel and Young Frankenstein is a parody
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:I'm just tired of hearing about how mad everyone is about remakes and reboots. It's like you're rebooting that opinion that everyone and their mother has had for the last decade. It's just like the hacks that make these cash grab remakes, but for opinions. I realize it's tiresome, man. That said, all he superhero movies and shameless cash ins is also pretty triesome. I guess what I'm saying is gently caress movies *knocks over popcorn with a cane*
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
DoctorGonzo posted:name pics or gtfo
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
No Mods No Masters posted:Cinema Discusso is the worst board of the forums, and that's saying a lot considering this board of the forums it seriously is. I'm not going in there. If one of you guys want to go have fun
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
bloom posted:For people who say CD is terrible, you guys sure seem to have detailed knowledge about CD posts and posters. Have you considered just not going there? I don't. I haven't browsed CineD in years. There's a reason for that. I think the only people left who regularly post in CD are people like SMG and MisterBibs who love jerking off into their own mouths and pretending they're visionary geniuses. It's... a really, really weird place with opinions from a bizarro universe and on rare occasions when CD actually interacts with the outside world beyond their bubble, people are just like "what in the gently caress are you smoking" like the time when Jack from RLM pooped on MisterBibs
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
I think CineD is basically like an experiment designed to take down postmodern critical theory by making it as absurd and stupid as humanly possible
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
Ghostbusters' failure was from the top, not the bottom. Amy Pascal and Tom Rothman should take most of the blame. After all, they were the ones who thought it would be a good idea to give this movie to Paul Fieg and market it the way they did. Paul Fieg is a dumbass and a horrible fit for Ghostbusters, but it's not like he hired himself. And it's not like he hasn't ever done anything good in the past. Ultimately Ghostbusters is a movie that is so beloved and popular that if you make a remake of it, no matter how good it is or who you have do it, it will go over like a turd in a punch bowl. And it was the executives who signed off on the movie. The majority of the blame ultimately should go to them, although Paul Fieg also is largely responsible and is the guy who has caught the most flak and his career has been killed for it. Most of the actresses from Ghosbusters who aren't Melissa McCarthy are pretty decent and it's unfair for them to catch heat for the movie. This is precisely why the remakes of Star Wars and Jurassic Park were disguised as sequels. Can you imagine what would happen if they did a full on remake of Star Wars? People would loving riot. You think Ghostbusters made the Internet a shitshow? That would be fuckin' nothing if they did that with Star Wars. People are still raging about the prequels (and a certain someone made big longform reviews for them.) I guess what I'm saying is buckle up and hold on tight folks because if Episode 8 sucks (and I have a feeling it will) the backlash is gonna be a hell of a ride. A GLISTENING HODOR posted:Or, bare with me here, maybe the takeaway from 18 years of widespread internet message boards is that drooling dipshits love pretending to be smart by memorizing the names of a couple of logical fallacies and one or two philosophy talking points and then fill in the gaps with purestrain idiotic horseshit. Well, I mean yeah, this is what it actually is. I'll admit that I'm a complete dumbass and that alone makes the two of us smarter than anyone in CD GET IN THE ROBOT fucked around with this message at 15:47 on Aug 11, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
Monkey Fracas posted:deliberately pushing the feminism angle in the marketing for this fuckin turd and kinda cynically stirring the pot online was pretty gross and probably the most reprehensible thing about the entire production Ding ding ding. And it's not like they're the only ones who have done this by a longshot, it's a trend these days for cynical marketing to try and trick people into thinking they're making the world a better place. Starbucks has been doing this forever. All you have to do is trick stupids into thinking that buying a product is somehow making the world a better place. Then you have ones that are just so shamefully transparent that even the dumbest of dummies don't believe it. Like when companies such as BP and Exxon run commercials about how they care about the environment and want to save it. LOL come the gently caress on. Does anyone really think Exxon-Mobil really cares about "going green" and ensuring the Earth is a nice planet to live on? The only green they care about is a huge stack of Ben Franklins.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
reignofevil posted:I actually dont buy the whole "The original was so good that no matter what a remake/sequel/unterseaboot would be hated" because when has that actually been true ever? It's because like it or not, people will always compare it to the original and they go into it with impossible expectations that can never be met. So you basically have to surpass the original or people will be pissed because they're holding these things to really, really high standards. So I guess I'm saying it's the audience's fault? Well, kind of, but people should know well enough to expect that. A GLISTENING HODOR posted:Seriously, Sony, you're probably going to be out of business within the year. How much would it kill you to hire me to slap your idiot executives around and tell them they're stupid when someone suggests spending half a billion dollars on a scriptless comedy that everyone will hate sight-unseen because it's a remake? That's not how big business works usually, Tom Rothman has been a fuckup and giant rear end in a top hat for DECADES and it's just the underlings who get the flak. Most people haven't even heard of him. You ever see that Kevin Smith video when he was going to make a superman movie? I mean, you may or may not like Kevin Smith and there's plenty of reasons not to, but the crazy executive he was talking about was Tom Rothman. The same guy responsible for Catwoman, X3 and a bunch of other bombs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wo2KB1dEDdk I mean, Paul Fieg is kind of a douche and I don't really feel sorry for him or anything, but it is unfair that all of the blame gets lumped completely on him and his whole career gets tanked because of it. But, well, life really isn't fair.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:And yeah, I basically have that Kevin Smith speech memorized. Yeah I mean, I'm definitely not sad that failed conman Paul Fieg got stomped, it's just that stupid executives annoy me much more in general And I mean... he's not even a very good conman because the only people he fooled were the dumbass execs and dopes who bought into the "you just hate this movie because sexism!" narrative Nobody else bought it, because well... nobody went to go see the movie lol
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
Hemingway To Go! posted:lol i clicked on corn's probation avatar to see what that was about and saw the ghostbusters thread lol yeah dude what did I say, never post in CD, not even once MisterBibs is one of the dumbest people on earth and he's like the baseline for discussion there
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
Zmej posted:Can we just post about tcc until the next marvel movie comes out to disappoint us? You're making the assumption that any of us are actually excited for yet another marvel movie
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:btw, speaking of sony pictures oh lord......... ugh nope not pretentious at all
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
I don't mind Jack. He's all right. If you want to see an annoying friend of an internet celebrity just look up Mike Matei
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
Firefly was a pretty good show that got cancelled. People just get really annoyed by it because its fans act like it was the best science fiction show ever made when it wasn't. Maybe if Firefly has lasted more than one season, who knows, it could have been. Or they could have driven it into the ground like most sci-fi franchises. Nobody knows. It's nowhere near as important and influential as something like Star Trek, Star Wars or Doctor Who.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 09:54 |
|
|
a bone to pick posted:Apparently Whedon's Wonder woman script consisted of horrible sexism lol Man it doesn't even seem that bad and that dude just bends over backwards for the woke crowd and they still poo poo all over him. I really don't have strong feelings for or against the guy but jeez you just can't win.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2017 02:24
|
|