|
IF HE REACHES THE CENTRAL HUB THE WATER PRESSURE WILL BLOW. *repeat six times through the otherwise really good climax until my brain melts.* loving hell what a snipe. Sorry guys.
|
#
¿
May 12, 2023 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 14:59 |
|
|
Alexander Hamilton posted:Randomly watched the Batman rescues Martha scene and goddamn does it kick rear end. I can’t believe we’re not going to get an entire movie of that. In the middle of his operatic take on the fall and redemption of Batman, Snyder finds time for the Batman fight scene every one had in their head as a child.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2023 03:33
|
|
|
teagone posted:Fashion. Also it's his goon squad and they're coming to town. beep beep
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2023 21:53
|
|
|
He's helped move quite a few people from 'hey it's that guy' to 'oh, rad, *name* is in this movie.' Oscar Isaac, Patrick Wilson, Jackie Earle Hailey, Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Gerard Butler, Michael Fassbender...probably some others I'm forgetting about. Martman posted:Gal Gadot is the only one that's soured over time, but I don't blame him for choosing her. In general he's one of the best at having an individual eye for casting and clearly building up a personal rapport with people. She works well in his movies because he relies on her more as a physical actor, which she is good at. She's in a comparable bracket to Arnie: couldn't do a monologue, struggles with dialogue, but moves and stands very well on camera. Arnie obviously has much better comedic timing, but he also had to learn that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2023 03:43
|
|
|
He's also several notches more pathetic than his portrayal of Zuck. His Zuck is a calm, cool, collected dude who dominates every room he's in. He's only awkward in the sense that he doesn't indulge in social niceties. Meanwhile, his Luthor is genuinely pathetic and can't even get through his own monologues without falling apart. His Luthor is actually more like the real Zuck than his Zuck was.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2023 23:32
|
|
|
This thread rules
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2023 22:21
|
|
|
If there's any CGI industry goons here, I'd genuinely love them to explain what's going on with the Flash. Something about every big effects shot from it that I've seen has been...off. Don't know how to explain it but it's off. like, not just in the sense of it not looking realistic, but looking straight up at odds with reality. It's a shame that it isn't being used to depict 'non-euclidean geometry' because if it was intentional, it's use of perspective and motion would be unsettling in a cool way instead of leaving you wondering what kind of hellish production process it had.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2023 02:24
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:We had a VFX goonster in another thread tell us that what's happened: Disney needing 2.5k effects shots per movie distorted the entire industry into an international churn and burn model, so now they're grabbing anyone and everyone overseas and working them until the quit. The entire industry is now "beginners trying their best", which is why stuff looks demonstrably worse than 10 years ago. I more meant the specific technical issues that lead the Flash to look like that. I absolutely understand the large scale problem that the industry is having but I know gently caress all about the minutae of CGI and would love someone more knowledgable to explain it. Grendels Dad posted:Someone here or a similar thread mentioned the name of the phenomenon in which all experienced workers are gone within a relatively short time without training new people so the new people have to figure out problems that were already solved. I can't find it and my Googlin is weak. It was me. The term is 'institutional amnesia' coined by Australian columnist Laura Tingle, who used to go out with Sam Neil. That last part isn't really relevant but it is how my parents ended up meeting Sam Neil.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2023 22:23
|
|
|
josh04 posted:Extremely cool dude, will check it out. seconded.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2023 23:43
|
|
|
Not much what's Nibelung with you?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2023 22:45
|
|
|
There's honestly probably a PHD's worth of material in our collective reaction to Man of Steel. The anticipation before it (finally, he punches things!) then the immediate reaction (I saw a lot of people who recited the take that it didn't work because he was too concerned with 'realism' a take they'd recycled from the Nolan films) and then the absolute brain melt insular takes where people hated an entirely different movie to the one that came out. I can't remember another film that produced such weird takes, that broke people's brains to the same extent. I get not liking films, but people got this filter or search/replace function in their mind when it came to Man of Steel. You know the stuff, things about how Superman doesn't save anyone or the 'maybe' scene.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2023 23:06
|
|
|
There's also a very deliberate conceit in how Man of Steel is shot. Virtually every shot is made to feel like it could physically exist, including the shots where everything is CGI. The camera whips around, trying to catch the movement of two superfast beings. It zooms in at a distance, trying to make sense of a cataclysm that's happening over there. The Kryptonian leap towards the cockpit of the plane is captured by it's nose camera (or possibly a camera in the cockpit, I'd have to check). Even when it flies with Superman in that cool shot where he punches Zod so hard Zod has a sonic boom, the camera just moves alongside them, it doesn't pivot around, tracking them perfectly. It's a subtle thing, but there's a consistent idea that the camera is struggling to keep up with what's happening. There isn't an equivalent of that impossibly smooth tracking shot that looks at every Avenger in turn. In fact, it very deliberately eschews that style. You're left with a major action scene that, while it looks amazing, has camera work that feels a little like it was pieced together after the fact. It's also in deliberate contrast with Snyder's other action scenes, with their speed ramping. The speed ramping is how those characters saw themselves, while Man of Steel's action is how we (regular humans and bystanders) see it. It's kind of like in anime, where it zooms out and the sword fight is just a blur, except it's meant to be terrifying instead of cool.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2023 23:01
|
|
|
To briefly return to Warcraft, it could be used to teach the importance of actually adapting source material. The Orcs are transplanted wholesale from the game, complete with their bizarre proportions. They actually look pretty good, which makes sense since there are short CGI segments in the game. The humans aren't, though, not entirely. They have the big goofy armour, but on normally proportioned humans. Aside from looking stupid (and it does look really stupid) it also results in humans who a) look like they can't move or fight and b) probably actually couldn't do any serious stuntwork. Which means that the war aspect of 'warcraft' has to be on the backburner since none of your human actors can actually do any stunts. As a result, you have to spend a lot more time on the lore, and the lore is really loving stupid. Much more noticeably stupid than if it was at least punctuated by some decent fight scenes or big setpieces. A better Warcraft movie is either complete CGI or more of its own thing, able to adapt the designs, characters and themes into something that works in the context of a live action film. There's also the woman orc who is literally the below meme to a genuinely embarassing extent. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2023 00:56
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:The human knights move and fight and do stunts in their armor fine I've watched the film and no they don't. gently caress, what a poo poo snipe. sorry.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2023 23:15
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:Hasn't Hopkins, like, won Oscars recently? If he is doing a "One for you, one for me" kind of thing, I honestly can't say which are the ones he does for himself, and that's pretty awesome. Hopkins does not give a poo poo and will throw himself into anything. He was energetically in a transformers movie and described Michael Bay as a genius. He seems to actually like doing pulp and his career is full of it. For every "The Human Stain" there's a "Bad Company" for every "The Two Popes" there's a "Transformers: The Last Knight" He's an enthusiastic dude and loves the art form in every shape it takes. There's that lovely email he sent Bryan Cranston congratulating him and everyone else involved on how good Breaking Bad was.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2023 00:55
|
|
|
teagone posted:I guess that's kinda funny lol. Because it's so absurd. I don't mind it I got in a facebook argument with one and when I asked for examples, he responded with the usual stuff about the bus and pa kent's death, but then he finished with this.: "I'm thinking of the scene in the bar, where Clark, in a confrontation with a bully, who is sexually harassing a waitress, later destroys the man's truck. It's a pointless, petty act that doesn't actually teach the man a lesson, or serve to make him a better human, or even bring any sort of justice to the wronged woman (who will almost certainly be accosted by the same man the next time he comes through town). No, Snyder's Superman simply engages in an act of destructive revenge in the vein of Howard Roarke blowing up the housing project when the people in charge of it dared to defy his perfect architectural design. The circumstances of the act indicate that it has nothing to do with righting a wrong or preventing a future one - it has to do with punishing someone who defied him." And if you're wondering if he held up the Donner films (where Superman beats the poo poo out of a guy with superpowers for humiliating him in a different timeline) you know he did. It's interesting how, in ten years, the discussion around MoS hasn't only not advanced, it's actually gotten way worse and far dumber. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Jul 21, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2023 04:01
|
|
|
It was darkly amusing that the 'faux progressive man who attacks those who disagree' was supposed to be leading the charge against Whedon post Ultron. It was just a generally accepted type of guy. A progressive who's actually probably a predator. It turned out that the archetype did exist and was involved in the story, just not the way we thought.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2023 01:35
|
|
|
Martman posted:In the sense of the movie putting serious limitations on Superman's abilities I think there's a point there, but obviously they're phrasing it in a way that most people would not say is their problem. Alongside this, both father figures in the story having limitations to their wisdom and that being an explicit part of the text.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2023 22:18
|
|
|
My favourite exchange happened years ago on a much dumber website than this one. Someone called it nihilistic and when I asked what they meant, immediately just said 'yeah, I don't know what nihilistic means. It was honest. I think most conversations I've had about MoS (not here, but around the internet) have been variations on that just with people who won't admit they don't fully understand their own criticism.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2023 22:58
|
|
|
McCloud posted:Yeah, we have ample evidence that a lot of the dissatisfaction comes from either the denial of the escapist power fantasy, or that the characters deviate too much from what nerds conceive to be their "true" versions, i e Batman uses guns Coupled with an unwillingness to think about why they're depicting the character that way. For instance, the exchange I posted upthread about the confrontation with the trucker. That's Clark at an early stage of his life and career, still figuring out what he is and what Superman should be. He's figuring out his own values (which are largely what define him) the same way Spiderman is figuring out his abilities when he falls off buildings or whatever. If he approaches it and responds in a less than ideal way, it's a reflection of where he is at that point. It's also, cleverly, a microcosm of what Megaman's Jockstrap is talking about. The waitress sort of accepts the harassment (or at least discourages Clark from escalating) because, well, it happens all the time. It's a recurring, systemic problem. Superman can't punch sexism in the face anymore than he can punch global warming or plutocracy. Even if we'd had that guy's ideal scene where Superman helps that guy grow and change as a person, the trucker will leave the conversation and have his sexism reinforced two hundred times before the next day is out. It's a scene that exists in the film for a very specific reason and is done the way it is with a purpose in mind, but the guy i was talking to already had a different film in his head and simply wondered why it wasn't the way he imagined it, rather than thinking about why it was the way it was.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2023 23:12
|
|
|
McCloud posted:The "Snyder is an objectivist" being the biggest example Well the same guy talked about Pa Kent's death scene (because of course he did) and referenced the Donner take on the same event. The interesting thing is that, yeah, sure, you can prefer that scene and that's fine,it's a great scene, but MoS isn't failing to do what that scene did. The 78 scene is about the limits of Superman's power, and him accepting that. In a way, it's a weird scene to include, since the film ends with him literally going back in time and fixing everything and saving everyone. However, that's not what the MoS scene is doing, it's about thinking about the consequences of your actions, it's about the inevitable larger impact that someone like Superman has simply by publicly existing. It helps explain why he's kept in the shadows for his whole life. But this guy didn't simply prefer the 78 scene, he framed it as MoS failing to do something that it quite clearly wasn't trying to do. It's weird how these movies have this effect. Lindsay Ellis is generally pretty good at analysing and thinking about film, but that same scene provoked a terrible take from her, too. Not quite as bad, but she also concluded that it was trying to do something that it isn't really doing and that it failed at setting that up. It's in her video on the symbolism of the boot in Fury Road if you feel like looking it up. You get an excellent analysis of a whole relationship being symbolised by the exchange of shoes as well as her completely failing to read a scene where the characters simply explain what's happening.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2023 00:23
|
|
|
Zombies running helped me enjoy zombie films since walking zombies are possibly the least threatening thing imaginable. Yeah, sure, there's an endless horde. How did that come to be? How did the first zombie catch anybody? It's odd that the 'tactical realism as applied to zombies' crowd hates fast zombies, since slow ones really only make sense on a symbolic level: You wake up one morning and everyone is hostile, you are no longer part of a crowd, and the crowd wants to kill you. It's a wonderful manifestation of 'in-group/out-group' fears but as soon as you think about how it gets that way without magic or something, it falls apart. Meanwhile, sprinting, highly aggressive zombies would certainly cause at least a couple of weeks of trouble. Probably not civilisational collapse but certainly long enough for a decent action film. On digital photography, Collateral doesn't look lovely, but it uses very specific digital photography to get a very specific look that is particular to that era of digital photography. Does that count? Public Enemies kind of does the same thing but just isn't very good. Pirate Jet posted:...arguable When there's a genre film that's set a low bar for itself and fails to clear it, like the Hobbit or something, she's good. She has a very workman/engineer like perspective. "You want this to pay off later so you need this set up here. You need less of this and more of this." Basically, for films that should be following a blueprint but fail to follow it, she can look at the blueprint and read it. She's the opposite of a film-troper. She absolutely understands conventions and structure, why both exist, and how to apply them. The moment it's anything more esoteric, that's aiming for any level of ambiguity, she struggles and cannot get away from the word 'supposed' as in 'this scene is supposed to (do a thing it's quite plainly not supposed to do) and it doesn't.'
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:My biggest problem is that the idea that a film needs to "follow a blueprint" is fake. In fact, genres are frequently created or pushed forward by unique embellishments or structures. I don't disagree with this and didn't say otherwise. Megaman's Jockstrap posted:This doesn't mean that narrative critique/analysis is worthless, but the perspective that there's a skeleton that the movie needs to be built on - determined by a nebulous "three act structure" or rules of "setup and payoff" - is bunk. The idea of set up and payoff or story structure are not bunk, dude. They don't need to be followed as rigidly as the 'don't save the cat' (or was it save the cat?) or hollywood producers think they do, but structure and set and payoff are both good things to have in a narrative. Especially if you want the audience to have a good time, which is the goal of making a straightforward, crowd pleasing genre film. You can create something wonderful and unique by knowing the rules and breaking them intelligently, either adding things or cutting them out. Two of my favourite examples are Way of the Gun and John Wick, both of which are defined as much by what they cut out of the traditional structure as what they add in. That's not the films I'm talking about, though. I specified that it was films that set a low bar for themselves where all they have to do is follow the blueprint that is clearly laid out and they gently caress it up. This is what Ellis is really good at analysing. It's a low bar of analysis, but she's good at it. Essentially, there's a level of art that we can call pulp. There are lots of different kinds, including but not limited to romcoms, hallmark movies, Agatha Christie syle 'accusing parlour' murder mysteries, tournament based martial arts movies, movies where an action person has to get someone they don't like across the country while pursued...The audience knows exactly what they're getting and isn't watching it for inovation, just good execution of a formula. There's absolutely a skill to doing it well, as evidenced by the many, many terrible examples and the relatively few good examples. Ellis is good at talking about the bad examples and explaining how they could have been better examples. Sorry to go on, but I thought it was important to be clear so we could avoid disagreeing on something we don't actually disagree about.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2023 22:30
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:What do you mean by "the hobbits set a low bar for themselves"? Expectations were extremely high for the prequels to LOTR, for everyone - cast, crew, audiences! The finished films definitely feature structures like set-up and payoff, so what? As in, it aims to be a very straightforward genre film. It's not trying to challenge conventions, narrative or stylistic. It's not a measure of quality. Bloodsport and Tekken are both pulpy martial arts films based around a tournamet. One executes the formula well and the other does not. Neither is what you'd call a good film, but Bloodsport does what it sets out to do while Tekken fails. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Aug 3, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2023 23:15
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:It feels like we're falling into the same old trap here where the genre label becomes prescriptive instead of descriptive. In my experience this ends in two outcomes: making approximately six thousand worthless sub-genres to explain why movies that share a few traits but are distinctively different from each other are still genre movies, or making a worthless overarching genre like "martial arts movies" that treats Enter the Dragon and Mortal Kombat '95 as functionally the same film. I think we're talking past each other. A film (or novel or tv show or video game or whatever) isn't bad if it doesn't fit the genre label. As we've both said, both directly and indirectly, plenty of great works are very squarely in a genre, except in the ways they aren't, either just doing the conventions better or by breaking those conventions and rules in meaningful ways. That said, there are plenty that aren't interested in that and are simply trying to be another entry in that genre, that are absolutely following conventions and rules. These are the ones Ellis is better at talking about. When she tries to talk about the former, she stops thinking about why they broke the rule or convention and merely points out that the diagram says they should have done it differently. It is funny that you chose the two examples you chose. It's actually a pretty good illustration of what I'm talking about. While they have their differences, on a meta level, they hit most of the same character and plot beats. They have set ups and payoffs that mirror each other beautifully. It's not one to one. Jax, Sonja and Cage are a mix and match of Roper's and Williams' characteristics and roles. Liu Kang doesn't pro-actively break the rules the way Lee does, he's more reactive. They're not the same film, but they're very much made off the same blueprint. It's a tricky thing to discuss since the kind of pulp I'm talking about generally has its examples forgotten. How many Westerns, for instance (a genre that absolutely has its conventions) are straightforward white hat/black hat films? There are undoubtedly thousands. How many can you actually name or remember? The ones we remember are more interesting than that. There's even a term for them: Revisionist Western. And the earliest examples date from about the beginnings of narrative film as a medium. Seriously, there's an example listed from 1904. I'll also say that this isn't a hard and fast line between 'challening' and 'pulp' it's more of a sliding scale.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2023 00:20
|
|
|
Bogus Adventure posted:Smaug dragon best dragon? I'll not hear any more of this best dragon erasure! I AM THE LASHT ONE. You've also reminded me of the incomprehensible gag in GTA 4 where, to mock endless franchises that keep having big entries with tons of merchandising, they had a parody of Dragonheart called Dragon-brain. This was in 2008, when it had had one follow up, 8 years earlier that had gone straight to video. GTA's writers are loving weird. EDIT: but not as weird as the actual Dragonheart franchise, which is barely a franchise. It has three new entries since 2008, none of which have any characters, actors and only two crew members in common. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Aug 4, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2023 00:44
|
|
|
He also had an actual dragon. In Sucker Punch. It was dope.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2023 02:51
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:Sure, the hobbits are straightforward fantasy. Not sure how you're reaching the second conclusion there, all the framerate stuff and increasingly complex sfx would seem to qualify. Look, I've tried to explain it about three times now and you're not getting it. Either I'm completely wrong or I'm just terrible at explaining it so I'm going to drop it. feedmyleg posted:No. Watching a "Book Edit" made it very, very clear that outside of the first act, there just isn't anything to salvage. It's rotten to the core. I'm going to disagree here. In the battle scenes in the first and third film, and in some of the mirkwood scenes, in the set pieces from the book, you can see something good: A goofy, over the top, highly stylised take on the story. There's a shot from the battle flashback in the first one as the armies meet, backlit by the sun, that could be straight out of 300. The 'Twirly Whirlies' the Dwarves use to shoot down the Elven arrows (that, of course, disappear straight after, like all the other cool ideas) I can easily imagine appearing in Warhammer Fantasy Battle or DnDs more steampunk settings. The bit where Legolas decapitates 200 orcs while hanging upside down from a giant bat would be great as a Mel Brooks bit if he was parodying the Romance of the Three Kingdoms or something. There are flashes of an enjoyable film, one where Bilbo, worried his audience is getting bored, is constantly making poo poo up and exagerrating. But they're stuck in the same movie as an imperfect recreation of Lord of the Rings' lived in fantasy realism, the hobbit book's generally more whimsical, fairy tale tone, and also a grim movie where all the good guys are constantly threatening to kill each other if the other betrays them, plus stuff that only works as a prequel to LOTR and whatever the gently caress Alfred was supposed to be. Also the whole thing is 9 loving hours long. It's a film with an incomplete vision so for every scene where they had a good idea for it and executed it well, there's five others that either sort of worked but were quite clearly just a 'good enough' execution from people who didn't have enough time or energy. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 02:16 on Aug 5, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2023 02:12
|
|
|
Superman: Hey, Lex, glad I could save you from some fists and abominations. Sorry I couldn't save you earlier. *winks at camera* Lex: *shocked gasp* wow, I've been wrong all along Doomsday: *astonished gasp, visible awe at Superman's selflessness* Old man in control room: If that pressure wave reaches us the water supply right across the whole city is gonna blow! 'No More Dead Cops' guy: NO MORE DEAD COPS.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2023 02:41
|
|
|
Ammanas posted:good lord the NO MORE DEAD COPS line massively triggered me. It's memorable since Dark Knight is a drat well put together movie and the line is delivered by a guy who's clearly heard of movies and dialogue but has never seen either.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2023 03:02
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:I mostly just remember the SMBC comic where Kryptonians were actually sending their kids out like Saiyans, and after some social changes come to pick up Superman expecting him to have conquered Earth, but are terrified to learn that he was already busy full time protecting it from all the other superpowered sociopaths on it. So you're saying Invincible is actually an anime?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2023 22:46
|
|
|
Can't believe Snyder made a movie exclusively out of live action recreations of weird sci fi fantasy book covers, the same way Doom Eternal wove its plot exclusively out of heavy metal album covers. gently caress yeah. It looks like it's got a bunch of cool poo poo, a bunch of goofy poo poo and a bunch of cool goofy poo poo. I was already on board.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2023 22:15
|
|
|
josh04 posted:I also had this thought Mixed in with quite a lot of French Comic books. Plus anime, obviously. Because it's Snyder.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2023 22:29
|
|
|
Total Meatlove posted:Isn’t Jupiter Ascending plus French comic books not Luc Besson & Metal Hurlant Chronicles? No Luc Besson is dead and always was. Also, hey fellow person who remembers Metal Hurlant Chronicles. We need to find the other two people who've seen that and form a band. Actually, turns out I was thinking of 'the Mutant Chronicles' never mind.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2023 23:15
|
|
|
quote:Everything he does is so backwards motivated, reverse-engineered based on how he wants it to be discussed by Comic-Con attendees, rather than developed naturally from artistic intent. This quote is genuinely fascinating. The last two decades of reactions to his work shows that 'pleasing nerds' is not in his list of priorities at all. It's basically what defines the absolutely terrible discourse around him and his films. Snyder's haters have moved on from misremembering his films to misremembering the real world's reaction to those films.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2023 02:58
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:We still haven't gotten Army of the Dead UHD...although tbh I'm not sure I want to own it, there's good action there but it's such a maudlin and bleak movie in so many ways. I've said it before but I don't say clever sounding things often so I'll repeat it: Dawn of the Dead is about the morning of 9/11. Army of the Dead is waking up one day and the war on terror is 20 years old.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2023 00:02
|
|
|
checkplease posted:I was going to say make a super cut of neck snaps, but is it MoS and Owl movie only? Hopefully rebel moon brings some back. Watchmen had one. I'm pretty sure at least a couple of the massive armies of goons in Sucker Punch featured neck snaps. Army of the Dead has at least one. 300 has one. Dawn of the Dead may not. It's definitely a recurring thing for him.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2023 22:48
|
|
|
Actually, with Elon sabotaging a Ukrainian military operation by turning off his Starlink satellites (quite possibly because Ian Miles Cheong told him to) BvS just becomes more prescient, although it does give Lex entirely too much credit and dignity.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2023 00:17
|
|
|
The Lord of the Rings, The Battle for Middle Earth 2: The War in the North: The Rise of the Witch King.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2023 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 14:59 |
|
|
It rules that the narrative 'he just puts things in without thinking about them' has grown up around Snyder, who is clearly one of the most detail orientated directors working these days.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2023 01:24
|
|