Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

:nws:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JO6isH-zhU

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

feedmyleg posted:

And then the FX people take the time to unionize in the meantime.

I don't think a union is going to fix the problem with FX. A bunch of different countries/states/regions all competing with each other with tax credits means that hollywood will just move on to the next place if a union is formed. Unions and strikes are going to do jack poo poo if the entire work force is regularly fired anyways and there is no interest in sticking to one place or even the same country.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Tars Tarkas posted:

I hope the The Thing sequel is a random movie that suddenly turns into a sequel in the last 20 minutes

Romantic comedy where the love interest turns out to be The Thing in the last 5 minutes.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

This is a TV show, but its worth posting.

https://twitter.com/yugiohtas/status/1665021334311653379

I think using a body double would've worked better even if he didn't really look like the actor lol.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Zechariah posted:

It's fine but he should have leaned into the fact that The Thing is specifically NOT a hivemind but a libertarian collective with fragile instinctually aligned values. Every little part of it is in it for itself, the greater good be damned. Two separate Things would rather the other burn than be caught themselves, their fingers don't trust each other, and the left leg voting block keeps complaining about roads.

Entire rest of the body: "Don't you do it! Don't you rat us out you little shits! The rest of the blood cells kicked you out because they knew how much you suck!"

Blood: "gently caress you, gently caress you all."


Watts loses a letter grade for not reading the assignment properly.

I think that The Thing is possibly a non-sapient mindless creature unless its a imitating a sapient creature and even then it isn't really self-aware, but just a P-Zombie with a directive to survive and infect others. Although it could also be self-aware though because it knows how to build a UFO. Heck the people its imitating might not even be aware that they are The Thing except when its instincts take over. When its just blood, its not able to respond intelligently.

I think its far more interesting and scary if the audience isn't made aware how it operates. It could be an animal acting on instinct or a malicious being that knows exactly what it is doing.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Young Freud posted:

We are shown, multiple times, that the Thing possess an intelligence. It knows when to ambush targets of opportunity like Bennings or the dogs; it recognizes MacReady's growing influence over the group and schemes to convince others that MacReady is a Thing and eliminate him, which it almost pulls off; it makes arrangements to separate and ambush the others by loving with the power, cutting the guide ropes, etc. ; and the Blair Thing is clearly building an escape craft so it can leave Antarctica before things get bad.

Which is why I mentioned P-Zombies. It could be imitating a human who has self-awareness, and the imitation human is able to make complex plans to fulfill the objectives of the The Thing but The Thing is not actually intelligent itself. It could be a dumb animal in charge of smart humans. Its only objective is to survive and infect others.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

The movie looks like it was done in the corporate art style (AKA Corporate Memphis).

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Pope Corky the IX posted:

NFTs just happened.

NFTs are a completely worthless technology that never has and never will have value. AI might be production ready a few years down the road (I think its first use case will be SFX and not image generation from scratch), but its absolutely not the case now.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

ALFbrot posted:

The Tick, you mean

The Tick was insanely expensive, it was one of the most expensive shows to make of all time, so it was actually understandable about why it was cancelled.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Meh, I think this is actually understandable. They are certainly making way too much star wars poo poo.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

lmao just lmao
https://twitter.com/WarnerBrosNFT/status/1679838164276453377

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Professor Shark posted:

That commercial had a really early 2000’s FEATURES vibe to it

But what if only a handful of people could get access to them and probably have to pay an extremely excessive amount of money for the privilege?

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Feldegast42 posted:

Every movie that has had that money thrown at it that I've seen wastes it on terrible CGI slop were you can't tell what's even going on

Because of instead properly planning out a scene beforehand the director just forces fx studios to churn out endless variations until they get one they like.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Bar Crow posted:

Does it cost more to stream movies with colors?

Its costs time and money to color grade a film.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Snowman_McK posted:

Brightburn loving sucked. It had no interest in what makes successful 'what if superman was bad' story work: The evil supermen (Omni-Man and Homelander for instance) don't think they're evil. They think they're good. Omni-Man because he's executing a pretty comprehensive and successful (albeit ghastly) ideology and Homelander because, well, lots of people like him and he's a narcissist, so he must be good. Someone doing evil because they're evil is boring. Someone doing it because they think they're on the right side is inherently pretty compelling.

Someone in this thread, I think (or possibly the comic book or Snyder thread) pointed out that straightforwardly doing evil tends to take one form (robbing, murdering and so on) while doing good can take countless forms. Superman himself, in Man of Steel and BvS, struggles to decide exactly how to do good. Omni Man and Homelander have both chosen ways of 'doing good' but have chosen poorly. They're both possible outcomes for Superman if things had shaken out a little differently. Omni Man is pretty specifically Superman if he'd sided with Zod. Homelander is who he might be if he'd gotten corporate sponsorship as a child.

By contrast, the kid in Brightburn is just evil. No motive, no end game, certainly not in the film's run time. He kills for petty or reactive or indeed unknown reasons. There's no real way to tell an interesting story there. It'd be like trying to actually make Jason the main character. The events of the first film should have been compressed into the first twenty minutes. Then you cut to the character years later. Murdering or terrorising people with impunity has lost its luster and he's trying to figure out what to do with his immense power.

All we're left with is 'what if a slasher movie had an actually superhuman killer instead of an implicitly superhuman one' and it makes for a few effective kills and literally nothing else worth talking about. Or a version of 'we need to talk about Kevin' that's even less interesting. 'Kevin' at least had some good performances.

Yeah, the kid goes from an actual character to just a mindlessly evil entity overnight. There still could have been an interesting story with his parents trying to deal with the sudden change, but its more interested in focusing on the kid and it being a slasher film.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?


It being anything but a comedy would be a mistake.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?


A24 to be bought by Disney in 5 years.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Alan Smithee posted:

wonder if the Qcels are buying empty theaters again with the church collection plates since it's a movie about made up child kidnappings by a trumpy christian

It doesn't need some grand conspiracy to be popular. It was and still is very popular among young kids. I don't think most FNAF fans even know about the politics of the creator. I doubt there are empty theaters for them to even buy.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Ghost Leviathan posted:

It's been a problem with adaptations and franchises for a while that it seems like you keep ending up with failkid writers who can't get their own original and amazing stories picked up so they slap a well known IP on them and then blame nerd rage for when people don't give them the praise they deserve.

A lot of them seem to have disdain for the source material too since it gets in the way of their totally awesome original story and will brag about not actually looking at the original.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Punkin Spunkin posted:

I can't believe Gladiator 2 and Beetlejuice 2 are both finally happening, neither with their famously previously bandied about scripts as far as I can tell. Genuinely more worried about the latter, I'm not sure I trust Burton in 2023.

Gladiator 2 following the original script would have been great. I don't see the point of making a sequel to gladiator so long after the original unless it goes in absolute crazy direction like the Nick Cave script.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

AceOfFlames posted:

I remember some podcast raising a very interesting question: "Can you think of ANY directors whose last movie was also their best?" Ridley Scott is clearly not striving to join that club.

Satoshi Kon :smith:

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

A Worrying Warlock posted:

It may be because it's Miyazaki's only film I saw in the cinema, but The Boy and the Heron is up there with Mononoke and Spirited Away.

For me, Tarantino is another director who keeps topping himself. Nicholas Refn, maybe?

Miyazaki is going to work until he dies.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Majkol posted:

Where did the Stargate series originally in the US? I have a vague memory from my childhood in Europe seeing the pilot at 10 am on a Saturday on network TV and seeing some unexpected boobs I think.

It was originally on showtime, and the change in budget is really obvious once it switches over to Sci-Fi, because the earlier seasons didn't mainly film in the same park in Canada.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

dr_rat posted:

lol. That's great.

Which brings up the question, if it was testing well, is canceling it for I'm assuming just a simple tax writer off worth it? Like why produce the thing in the first place if they didn't think it would make some money if it came out okay?

Do we just need to assume they were going to start canceling anything that they thought wasn't going to be a massive hit?

a lot of CEOs do not give a gently caress about projects they did not greenlight, because they can't claim credit for it. If they cancel a film though, they can say they are saving the company money.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Casimir Radon posted:

One of the most frustrating things about reality tv is how it took over what were supposed to be educational channels. We didn’t have cable when I was growing up. So I was extremely happy whenever PBS had a history of science show on. But I wanted cable channels that showed that kind of thing all the time. 2007 comes along and my parents finally decide to get cable. It wasn’t bad at that point but it was certainly headed there. Discovery still had good stuff but they were also showing way too much Deadliest Catch. Go forward about 5 years from that and Discovery and History is wall to wall garbage all day long. You’d be hard pressed to find something in any given week that was actually worth watching.

What happened to The Learning Channel was especially infuriating. I used to love that channel as a kid, and now its just absolutely worthless garbage.

History Channel was always kind of bad though. Even before the reality/ancient aliens stuff it was just the 24/7 World War II channel.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Remulak posted:

Advertising as a revenue model is the enemy of anything good. That’s why cable TV is a nightmare, even though it shouldn’t be with the level of carrier fees that are paid out. Or maybe it’s just capitalism.

I think the real issue is that there are a not insignificant number of people who actually like reality tv shows.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Parakeet vs. Phone posted:

I always thought people were kind of exaggerating how much trouble it was to enjoy the "cinematic universe" aspect since there weren't all that many connections and usually they could explain them with a sentence, but now it seems more true for about half of the releases.

Its output of content really increased ever since Disney tried to get into the streaming game. Its basically a repeat of when it made way too much star wars stuff and everybody lost interest.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Carpet posted:

One of the first characters in the TENET organisation that the Protagonist meets literally tells the audience that they shouldn't care too much about the science of it.

That's the dumb thing. It has this whole huge complex plot, but Christopher Nolan keeps on trying to tell his audience they shouldn't think about it too deeply. He even tries to use it justify his lovely sound mixing.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

I think a lot about the second movie works, its mostly just the pirate council stuff that drags it down, and the fact that they didn't give the film a proper resolution so they could get another movie out of it. I think the movies would have worked better if they were stand alone adventures instead of trying to have these epic ongoing plots. They tried to course correct in 4 to do that, but the damage was already done. 3 also let the Jack Sparrow character completely consume the narrative.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Casimir Radon posted:

I enjoyed Venom quite a bit, but the sequel was very forgettable. I haven’t really thought about it since it came out. Years of Spiderman fans talking your ear off about how edgy Carnage is if you let them and it’s a bit wet fart when he actually shows up.

I feel like Carnage would have worked better as a villain for Spiderman, instead of the character he is just the more edgy version of. Probably still wouldn't work very well though.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

I personally can't wait for 28 Millennia Later.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

I wonder if they are just going to ignore all the child molestation accusations or try to claim Michael Jackson was completely innocent and the entire thing was unfair persecution.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Professor Shark posted:

Is this a Film Industry Finances thing or is it just possible they filmed an unworkable dud?

Considering they finished filming in 2021. It sounds more like an unworkable dud.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Mr Hootington posted:

By goons because they are old. I agree.

I don't think kids are going to be super into a movie about husbands using a made-up friend to justify being away from their wives.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

FlamingLiberal posted:

If it is indeed used as a tax write off, they have to delete all copies to prevent a leak I’m sure

They aren't just allowed to make money off of it.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

I'd have really like to have seen a sci-fi movie from him, even though the Star Trek deal did fall through.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Remulak posted:

This Coyote vs Acme thing is fascinating. There’s no way it’s not some personal beef someplace. Is it just Zaslov putting Gunn in his place by canning a movie he co-wrote that stars his consistent collaborator Cena? Did the director or one of the producers gently caress his wife, or not gently caress his wife?

The guy has publicly stated he hates scripted content. If he had his way there would be nothing but reality shows. He probably saw that an animated movie would probably be a huge success and he can't allow that to happen.

IShallRiseAgain fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Feb 11, 2024

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Casimir Radon posted:

Let’s take the Honey Boo Boo/Sons of Guns/Duggars guy and put him in charge of all our products.

Every one of those shows had major child molestation controversies. Discovery doesn’t just dumb down what’s supposed to be educational content, they also love hiring pedos.

I think its more because only absolute garbage human beings would demean themselves and their family on reality television for fame and money.

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Pirate Jet posted:

Alright look I think Coyote vs Acme should be released because everyone’s work should be seen and gently caress Zaslav and all that but let’s be real: nobody would care about it if it wasn’t for this. Looney Tunes haven’t been a box office draw in decades. Zaslav wants to can this movie because it was approved and funded under a previous WB administration, he doesn’t think it would do well in theaters, and it’s an instant payout in the form of a tax credit for a movie he didn’t even drop the money on to make.

Because Looney Tune movies have been poo poo for a long time. This one seems to be actually good. It also has Jame Gunn's name behind it. David Zaslav has also has made it very clear that he thinks animation doesn't belong on Max. I mean the no credit for it thing also applies, but that is the default. You seem to think its always about money with CEOs, but that isn't the case especially since there will be no consequences for their gently caress-ups.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

IShallRiseAgain
Sep 12, 2008

Well ain't that precious?

Invalid Validation posted:

Yea but Cage would ham it the gently caress up and it would be worth it for that alone.

Even Cage wasn't enough to save ghost rider.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply