| 18 AUG 2011 at 6:06pm |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Oh, thanks for that interesting bit of info. I thought that they were actually making use of some kind of portal... :-[
Have you been reading the books, Lady Kestrel?
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 18 AUG 2011 at 8:24pm |
Lady KestrelGuild Master
Posts : 4038
Joined: 27 SEP 2004
Location: US, NJ
Status : Offline | I read them all as they came out, Trav, but haven't seen the last 2 movies yet. For some reason, I missed Deathly Hallows part 1 in the theaters, so I've got to watch it on DVD before the second part leaves the theaters. I'm targeting it for this weekend.
"Where is the fountain that throws up these flowers in a ceaseless outbreak of ecstasy?"
-Rabindranath Tagore
|
| 18 AUG 2011 at 11:47pm |
CarolineJA+ Overseer
Posts : 16540
Joined: 28 JAN 2007
Location: AU
Status : Offline | SirDave - some important hints for your future cinematic enjoyment.
1. Always watch a series of movies in numerical order. Generally there is a steady build up of story-lore that, if missing, will greatly reduce enjoyment and comprehension on the viewer's part. As well, most of these sagas involve character development - again, things don't make sense if knowledge of previous developments/revelations is missing.
2. Harry Potter movies contain only a fraction of the content in the Harry Potter books. So you either read the books, or watch the movies but either way, you need to accept that this is a BIG story and you're only nibbling at the edge. So you won't understand it and you can't criticise the scrap you have seen.
Grudgingly, watched DH 1&2 for my wife's sake.
3. Please disabuse yourself of the notion that sitting unhappily next to your wife in the cinema enhances her enjoyment of the experience in any way. This is compounded if you complain about it afterwards as a waste of time. However, if you extended the event into a nice dinner and told her how much fun it was going out together like you did before the kids, yadda yadda... then she'll forgive you for not appreciating the movie properly.
Good luck for next time. :-*
|
| 19 AUG 2011 at 4:20am |
StilerJourneyman
Posts : 1461
Joined: 27 SEP 2004
Location: US, TN
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Fnord (16 AUG 2011 8:06pm)
Rise of the planet of the apes (Apornas planet (r)evolution)
Don't watch it. Please don't watch it. The acting was decent, the special effects were quite alright, but the plot was horrible. Oh, the trailer spoils the ending (actually, the trailer spoils almost the entire plot).
This movie tries to explain how the apes manages to take over the world. How, you might ask? Because someone injected them with a virus that made them super smart (which they do right at the start of the movie), and that could kill humans (but the virus was supposed to help with Alzheimer's disease).
I went to the movies this weekend and caught this film, I loved it.
It's not meant to be some mind-bending intellectual movie or a straight up action movie. It's a build up that shows how the apes come into being what they were in the classic POTA films.
I liked it because as far as characters go, Ceasar (the main ape of the movie) was a character that they worked well with, building him up, developing him from his entire life.
I'm not sure why you hated it so much.
As far as the drug goes, maybe you missed it but:
Spoiler AlertThe first batch of drugs, which were injected through the bloodstream, are the drugs that Ceasar Got. He was special because he didn't have anything wrong with him like the other apes they were testing, no brain damage, etc. He got the drug not from the shots like his mother, but instead passed down to him from her. This is why it "worked" on him from the start.
As far as the guys father, the cure worked on him. However it only worked for a short time. His immune system fought back and the drug wore off. This is where the guy develops the new air-based formula for the drug, it's much stronger and has a faster intake mechanism (as it's absorbed directly into the lungs/body).
However this version was not fully tested and the one guy who got accidently exposed found out the negatives of it. In turn he passed the virus onto the one guy and then so on and so fourth.
They never had a chance to test it (and the boss guy wanted to go into full production, even though James Franco's character didn't want to, thus he quit) so they didn't know it would harm humans.
You have to remember, this wasn't a simple drug, it was a virus. Without proper testing and with the accidental exposure such things are plausible.
Also the last part of the film, the bridge scene, was just plain epic. It showed perfectly that you had apes that were already leaning toward being "bad" and ones that were "good," like Ceasar, who only defended himself and did what he thought was right for his kind.
|
| 19 AUG 2011 at 4:57pm |
FnordSchattenjger
Posts : 2751
Joined: 15 SEP 2008
Location: SE, Stockholm
Status : Offline | Spoiler AlertYes I got that part, but the actual reason why he got so smart was the only part that the trailer did not spoil. The movie contained a bit too much "fluff" in general, that could have been cut down. But the way they handled the virus was just unsafe, no laboratory would ever handle it that way. When the person lost his mask, they did not even bother checking up on him. There is also more than a few problems related to how the virus actually worked which bugged me quite a bit, but I guess that it will only annoy people who are interested in biotechnology/biochemistry.
Also, a virus can be used to splice in elements into DNA chains, it is often done in laboratories, so it could be possible to transmit it from one generation to another, something that the scientists should have been well aware of, and a virus can also be transmitted from mother to child, so just letting him take the child could possibly have spread an untested virus. It was incredibly irresponsible of the people who did it.
I found Caesar to be a bit of a mixed character. In some parts, they really managed to get the smart chimp role done well, in others he just felt like he was emulating human behavior that he should not know that much about. The human actors though were overall rather unimpressive.
Most of the ending scene had already been spoiled for me as the trailers managed to show most of the interesting parts. I also found it to be a bit drawn out (then again, long action scenes is not really my thing), so while decent enough in its own right, anyone who has seen the trailers has already seen the bridge fight.
There were more things that I disliked about the movie, but I don't want to turn this into a long rant
|
| 21 AUG 2011 at 8:31am |
markornikovJourneyman
.jpg)
Posts : 1303
Joined: 28 OCT 2011
Location: BE, Antwerp
Status : Offline | that's why research on the subject is essential to writing a good plot.
It's sad that a movie is ruined just because the writers didn't care :
|
| 23 OCT 2011 at 8:55am |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | ...so the new season of Dexter has started. I'm not sure if I'm getting a bit bored with the show. It's become like a pair of old, comfortable shoes now. *yawn* I think they kind of overplayed their hand by making things a bit too over the top from the start, and now they don't have much of a hand left to play.
I am rather amazed at how they managed to make the character of ebb develop without it seeming totally unrealistic. When the show started, I couldn't stand her - she was like an irritating little 13-year old on her first date.
Now she's..-wow, so much more mature, and I'm actually quite starting to enjoy her character, foul mouth and all..
Anybody watched any of the movie/TV depictions of Scarlet Pimpernell? The books were in my father's library, but I never got down to reading them, so i was quite interested to see there's currently a movie in the making. I'd actually like to watch the TV show with Jane Seymour in it as well.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 23 OCT 2011 at 2:09pm |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2349
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By placeholder (23 OCT 2011 8:55am)
...so the new season of Dexter has started. I'm not sure if I'm getting a bit bored with the show. It's become like a pair of old, comfortable shoes now. *yawn* I think they kind of overplayed their hand by making things a bit too over the top from the start, and now they don't have much of a hand left to play.
I am rather amazed at how they managed to make the character of Debb develop without it seeming totally unrealistic. When the show started, I couldn't stand her - she was like an irritating little 13-year old on her first date.
Now she's..-wow, so much more mature, and I'm actually quite starting to enjoy her character, foul mouth and all..
I'm not too sure yet what to make of this season. I don't dislike it, but there's something missing, it seems. I'll keep watching, certainly: it's not like there's anything else worth watching.
Anybody watched any of the movie/TV depictions of Scarlet Pimpernell? The books were in my father's library, but I never got down to reading them, so i was quite interested to see there's currently a movie in the making. I'd actually like to watch the TV show with Jane Seymour in it as well.
I've watched the first three episodes of the 1999 television adaptation (Netflix doesn't have the other three, sadly...), and it's quite excellent. The actor playing Percy Blakeney is very intense, Robespierre is inscrutable, and Chauvelin nicely exudes confidence (despite failing continuously, as it his fate as the villain). A very fun romp, and I'm trying to find the other three episodes, but it's sadly not easy...
You can't kill someone in a studio.
|
| 23 OCT 2011 at 2:22pm |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By JKing (23 OCT 2011 2:09pm)
but there's something missing, it seems. ...
Yes, I was thinking that maybe it's because the "main background theme" (being that "doomsday" couple of murderers ) isn't quite as strong or as developed this season as in the other seasons. Maybe it's also because Dexter has not had any direct contact with them yet, and in the other seasons, he almost immediately engaged with Lumen, the Trinity killer, and so on.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 23 OCT 2011 at 2:26pm |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2349
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By placeholder (23 OCT 2011 2:22pm)
Originally Posted By JKing (23 OCT 2011 2:09pm)
but there's something missing, it seems. ...
Yes, I was thinking that maybe it's because the "main background theme" (being that "doomsday" couple of murderers ) isn't quite as strong or as developed this season as in the other seasons. Maybe it's also because Dexter has not had any direct contact with them yet, and in the other seasons, he almost immediately engaged with Lumen, the Trinity killer, and so on.
Perhaps that's it. I've wondered, by the way, about Dexter's adversary this season:
Spoiler AlertIs it really two, or just the one? Maybe the old man played by Edward James Olmos is the young man's equivalent of Harry?
You can't kill someone in a studio.
|
| 23 OCT 2011 at 3:08pm |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By JKing (23 OCT 2011 2:25pm)
Originally Posted By placeholder (23 OCT 2011 2:22pm)
Originally Posted By JKing (23 OCT 2011 2:09pm)
but there's something missing, it seems. ...
Yes, I was thinking that maybe it's because the "main background theme" (being that "doomsday" couple of murderers ) isn't quite as strong or as developed this season as in the other seasons. Maybe it's also because Dexter has not had any direct contact with them yet, and in the other seasons, he almost immediately engaged with Lumen, the Trinity killer, and so on.
Perhaps that's it. I've wondered, by the way, about Dexter's adversary this season:
Spoiler AlertIs it really two, or just the one? Maybe the old man played by Edward James Olmos is the young man's equivalent of Harry?
Interesting idea, JKing. I'll pay more attention next time.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 23 OCT 2011 at 3:42pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By JKing (23 OCT 2011 2:25pm)
Originally Posted By placeholder (23 OCT 2011 2:22pm)
Originally Posted By JKing (23 OCT 2011 2:09pm)
but there's something missing, it seems. ...
Yes, I was thinking that maybe it's because the "main background theme" (being that "doomsday" couple of murderers ) isn't quite as strong or as developed this season as in the other seasons. Maybe it's also because Dexter has not had any direct contact with them yet, and in the other seasons, he almost immediately engaged with Lumen, the Trinity killer, and so on.
Perhaps that's it. I've wondered, by the way, about Dexter's adversary this season:
Spoiler AlertIs it really two, or just the one? Maybe the old man played by Edward James Olmos is the young man's equivalent of Harry?
The very same thought crossed my mind, JKing or rather his...
Spoiler Alert"dark passenger" instead of his trusted fatherly advisor, which would be a very cool twist if true.
Either way, I've also enjoyed watching the development of his sister's character and this season seems to be a big turning point for her.
Spoiler AlertWill Deb succeed in her newfound leadership position? ("f*** balls are you kiddin'?" Will she rise to the occasion? Or will she be crushed by the stress of administrative responsibility and the manipulations of her former boss and that sleazebag deputy chief.
Also, long-term, will baby Harrison follow in daddy's footsteps?
Spoiler AlertHey, he already seems to like "daddy's box". Too bad it got broken... but that awful scene of him sitting in a massive pool of his own mother's blood after Trinity's final gruesome act sure felt a lot like the one of baby Dexter being rescued by Harry.
Cheers, Terry
P.S.
Spoiler AlertTonight's episode defined Dexter's latest foe as The Doomsday Killer and revealed the identity of his mentor. However, the elder killer's corporeal status is still very much in doubt. There were several scenes were he was completely ignored by others - as if he wasn't even there.
.
|
| 25 OCT 2011 at 8:09pm |
StilerJourneyman
Posts : 1461
Joined: 27 SEP 2004
Location: US, TN
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By placeholder (23 OCT 2011 8:55am)
...so the new season of Dexter has started. I'm not sure if I'm getting a bit bored with the show. It's become like a pair of old, comfortable shoes now. *yawn* I think they kind of overplayed their hand by making things a bit too over the top from the start, and now they don't have much of a hand left to play.
I am rather amazed at how they managed to make the character of Debb develop without it seeming totally unrealistic. When the show started, I couldn't stand her - she was like an irritating little 13-year old on her first date.
Now she's..-wow, so much more mature, and I'm actually quite starting to enjoy her character, foul mouth and all..
Anybody watched any of the movie/TV depictions of Scarlet Pimpernell? The books were in my father's library, but I never got down to reading them, so i was quite interested to see there's currently a movie in the making. I'd actually like to watch the TV show with Jane Seymour in it as well.
This is by far the worst Dexter season yet. It's missing any real tension/suspense.
This seasons "villains" are just simply not that interesting/unique.
I think part of the reason this season is lacking is because there's no more tension/suspense in the show. Either between the villains and Dexter, with their cat and mouse back and fourth like it was with Season 1 and the more recent John Lithgow season (which was the best villain imo) or the dexter-might-get-caught type of suspense that was played up in other seasons.
It just seems the show is in a slump right now, uninteresting villans, lack of suspense/mystery, etc.
There's no mystery this season, no "who is the killer" or anything, we know too much and it seems the writers just have no edge this season.
|
| 9 NOV 2011 at 8:18am |
StilerJourneyman
Posts : 1461
Joined: 27 SEP 2004
Location: US, TN
Status : Offline | Has anyone been watching the new show "Once Upon a Time?"
I'm quite enjoying it. It has an interesting premise and some good characters/actors in it. Basically it takes a lot of classic fairy tale characters, like Snow White, the prince, jiminy cricket, Rumpelstiltskin, Red riding hood, etc and places them all into our modern world where they aren't aware who they really are. I'd recommend giving it ia good if you like fairy tales/fantasy shows and things.
It's a HECK of a lot better then that "Grimm" show (which seems like a cheap cop drama show with a stupid cheap CGI "monster" flair to it.
|
| 9 NOV 2011 at 8:34pm |
Lady KestrelGuild Master
Posts : 4038
Joined: 27 SEP 2004
Location: US, NJ
Status : Offline | Stiler,
That was one I thought looked interesting when the ads went by but then I completely forgot about it. Maybe I'll catch it in reruns.
"Where is the fountain that throws up these flowers in a ceaseless outbreak of ecstasy?"
-Rabindranath Tagore
|
| 10 NOV 2011 at 8:00pm |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2349
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Tonight's episode of Community was yet another smash hit. What other show could have four musical numbers at the same time and have it be completely amazing? It's stunning.
You can't kill someone in a studio.
|
| 17 NOV 2011 at 6:29pm |
FnordSchattenjger
Posts : 2751
Joined: 15 SEP 2008
Location: SE, Stockholm
Status : Offline | I watched the first episode of Grimm yesterday. The adverstiment made it sound interesting, like a mix between X-files & Hunter: The Vigil. Of course what they did not tell you was that the show was filled with distractingly obvious product placement. I think Apple put a lot of money into this show, because early on they show you a surprisingly clean a good looking iPod (that supposedly had been dropped in the wood). The people who find it point out that it is an iPod, and the camera is focused on it. Then they talk to one if the friends of the victim who had dropped her iPod, and of course she had an iPhone (a normal person would say that she would show them a photo on their cellphone, but no, here they had to specifically say that it is an iPhone). And there was also a pair of boots that they less than discretely had to show a photo of (brand name clearly visible). I just found the amount of product placement to be too distracting, and I could not focus on the show itself, instead I just sat there and tried to spot the product placement.
|
| 19 NOV 2011 at 10:38am |
StilerJourneyman
Posts : 1461
Joined: 27 SEP 2004
Location: US, TN
Status : Offline | Hah yea, when they were like "Look, an Ipod!" I was like.........sigh, this is worse then The Island.
|
| 20 NOV 2011 at 9:22pm |
Lady KestrelGuild Master
Posts : 4038
Joined: 27 SEP 2004
Location: US, NJ
Status : Offline | I didn't see it, but I'm thinking that kind of blatant product placement could backfire. It's bad enough having to watch commercials between story segments. My feeling is if it has to be in the story, then it better be subtle.
"Where is the fountain that throws up these flowers in a ceaseless outbreak of ecstasy?"
-Rabindranath Tagore
|
| 21 NOV 2011 at 2:51am |
FnordSchattenjger
Posts : 2751
Joined: 15 SEP 2008
Location: SE, Stockholm
Status : Offline | I have not seen The Island, only clips on youtube showing how bad the product placement actually was in that movie. Still not quite as blatant as I Robot, but that movie is legendary because of its product placement.
All they really have to do is to simply have the characters use certain things that they have to use anyway. If everyone used apple-branded cellphones, then it would not have been nearly as obvious, yet the apple logo is distinct enough for people to notice it (in X-files everyone used Nokia phones, and I've not heard people complain about that).
|
| 26 NOV 2011 at 9:14am |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | So... re Dexter: Do you guys still hold your theory thatSpoiler AlertProfessor Geller is only in Travis's mind? How much you wanna bet he's for real?
Btw, I hated the episode featuring Dexter's dead brother. I found him so irritatingSpoiler Alert that I cheered when Dexter decided to run him over towards the end of the episode.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
Last edited by Traveller : 26 NOV 2011 9:20am
|
| 26 NOV 2011 at 9:34am |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2349
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | I still believe said theory to be correct, yes. My reasoning is as follows:
Spoiler Alert1. Geller has never worked entirely independently of Travis: we have never seen Geller murder when Travis was busy doing something else. Most recently he did kill "by himself", but while Travis was unconscious. One can surmise that Geller's personality took over Travis' body and did the work then.
Spoiler Alert 2. When Travis and Geller were out in public together, no one ever paid attention to Geller. Particularly this is true of the waitress.
Spoiler Alert 3. Dexter has yet to lay eyes on Geller, nd the direction seems to go to great lengths to make sure this is the case.
Spoiler Alert 4. Travis' sister mentioned that he was a very accomplished artist. Geller's paintings could in fact have been made by Travis.
Spoiler Alert 5. While Geller has physically interacted with Travis and also with their victims, Brian's interactions, as a confirmed figment of Dexter's imagination, are no more or less physical.
Spoiler Alert 6. Various other little hints just give the impression that Geller is Travis' inner demon by the way he talks about him.
You can't kill someone in a studio.
Last edited by JKing : 26 NOV 2011 9:35am
|
| 26 NOV 2011 at 12:31pm |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | It would indeed make an interesting twist, but I'm not entirely convinced. What r we betting?
Btw, I simply cannot recommend the 1972 series of War and Peace with Anthony Hopkins high enough. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069654/
It's one of the best investments I ever made in a TV series, and probably one of the few TV series that I will watch again. I finished watching it today, and I'm already missing it...
Ok, this is for people who enjoy classics and historic stuff, of course. I meant when choosing a rendition of War and Peace, especially if you've attempted the book and found it a bit... too padded. I know many people who find Tolstoy boring. ..but the series seemed less bloated than the book, which just really is too long.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
Last edited by Traveller : 26 NOV 2011 12:55pm
|
| 26 NOV 2011 at 4:02pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
I've had the exact same suspicions as JKing about Edward James Olmos' character in this season of Dexter.
Cheers, Terry
|
