Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

A Thread About Movies

1181921232499

Posts

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Mostly because the Brits co-opted the past when they were Empire building. I wonder, do you think that in a hundred years everyone in epic movies about the past will have American accents?

    AManFromEarth on
    Lh96QHG.png
  • EuphoriacEuphoriac Registered User regular
    What do you mean past? We've HAD this already.

    steam_sig.png
  • jakobaggerjakobagger KøbenhavnRegistered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Bagginses wrote: »
    wandering wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    My period gripe is the way everybody costumes in grey and brown, even though we know that past fashions were as (or more) colorful than they are now, simply because the actual examples of clothing we still have to look at it have lost their dyes over time.
    Also ancient Egypt/Greece/Rome were less monochromatic than they are often portrayed:

    gEQK5.jpg

    One thing I've come to realize about all the Aniquity Period Pieces how everyone's got the stateliest King's English going on in the way they talk, when, well, that may not have even been CLOSE to the way Romans/etc would've sounded in the original tongue. The whole patois of the speech was probably nothing of the sort.

    Sometimes I wonder if Julius Caesar's whole cadence and meter would be more along the lines of, say, some guy from Kentucky. It's the sort of thing we just won't ever know.

    He'd sound vaguely Italian.

    Not quite, actually. When Rome fell, the people in power hired Plutarch to make a new language because people were done with the tongue of the empire. So he prettymuch crafted the Italian language to with the intent of being very unlike whatever they were using in Rome before.

    I mean, it was Romantic so it fed off a lot of the Iberian and Gaul dialects in terms of structure, so it wasn't all new, but...yeah. Italian didn't exist during the actual Roman Empire.

    That is uh... Not how the history of language works. Or history (Rome didn't really fall at a well-defined point in time, it changed and/or faded away). Citation needed, to say the least.

    If it is still the first of April where you are and you are trolling me, well done.

    jakobagger on
  • WaldoWaldo Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    jakobagger wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    wandering wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    My period gripe is the way everybody costumes in grey and brown, even though we know that past fashions were as (or more) colorful than they are now, simply because the actual examples of clothing we still have to look at it have lost their dyes over time.
    Also ancient Egypt/Greece/Rome were less monochromatic than they are often portrayed:

    gEQK5.jpg

    One thing I've come to realize about all the Aniquity Period Pieces how everyone's got the stateliest King's English going on in the way they talk, when, well, that may not have even been CLOSE to the way Romans/etc would've sounded in the original tongue. The whole patois of the speech was probably nothing of the sort.

    Sometimes I wonder if Julius Caesar's whole cadence and meter would be more along the lines of, say, some guy from Kentucky. It's the sort of thing we just won't ever know.

    He'd sound vaguely Italian.

    Not quite, actually. When Rome fell, the people in power hired Plutarch to make a new language because people were done with the tongue of the empire. So he prettymuch crafted the Italian language to with the intent of being very unlike whatever they were using in Rome before.

    I mean, it was Romantic so it fed off a lot of the Iberian and Gaul dialects in terms of structure, so it wasn't all new, but...yeah. Italian didn't exist during the actual Roman Empire.

    That is uh... Not how the history of language works. Or history (Rome didn't really fall at a well-defined point in time, it changed and/or faded away). Citation needed, to say the least.

    If it is still the first of April where you are and you are trolling me, well done.

    Yes, and Plutarch died a few centuries before the fall of Rome (in the west), so this seems especially unlikely.

    Waldo on
    Senjutsu wrote: »
    when I was younger I had a drinking problem

    now I just have drinking solutions
    http://steamcommunity.com/id/weeman3
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Waldo wrote: »
    jakobagger wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    wandering wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    My period gripe is the way everybody costumes in grey and brown, even though we know that past fashions were as (or more) colorful than they are now, simply because the actual examples of clothing we still have to look at it have lost their dyes over time.
    Also ancient Egypt/Greece/Rome were less monochromatic than they are often portrayed:

    gEQK5.jpg

    One thing I've come to realize about all the Aniquity Period Pieces how everyone's got the stateliest King's English going on in the way they talk, when, well, that may not have even been CLOSE to the way Romans/etc would've sounded in the original tongue. The whole patois of the speech was probably nothing of the sort.

    Sometimes I wonder if Julius Caesar's whole cadence and meter would be more along the lines of, say, some guy from Kentucky. It's the sort of thing we just won't ever know.

    He'd sound vaguely Italian.

    Not quite, actually. When Rome fell, the people in power hired Plutarch to make a new language because people were done with the tongue of the empire. So he prettymuch crafted the Italian language to with the intent of being very unlike whatever they were using in Rome before.

    I mean, it was Romantic so it fed off a lot of the Iberian and Gaul dialects in terms of structure, so it wasn't all new, but...yeah. Italian didn't exist during the actual Roman Empire.

    That is uh... Not how the history of language works. Or history (Rome didn't really fall at a well-defined point in time, it changed and/or faded away). Citation needed, to say the least.

    If it is still the first of April where you are and you are trolling me, well done.

    Yes, and Plutarch died a few centuries before the fall of Rome (in the west), so this seems unlikely.

    That's just what the CHURCH wants you to think. Sheeple, all of you.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • AllforceAllforce Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Watched Battle Royale Directors Cut tonight, I found it amusing in spots, endearing in others, and just sort of ridiculous overall. That said I enjoyed my time watching it. My wife was ambivalent yet awake throughout (which is usually a sign she enjoyed a film) but I only roped her into watching it because I told her it "it's like the original Hunger Games".

    Allforce on
  • BagginsesBagginses __BANNED USERS regular
    edited April 2012
    Nought wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    wandering wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    My period gripe is the way everybody costumes in grey and brown, even though we know that past fashions were as (or more) colorful than they are now, simply because the actual examples of clothing we still have to look at it have lost their dyes over time.
    Also ancient Egypt/Greece/Rome were less monochromatic than they are often portrayed:

    gEQK5.jpg

    One thing I've come to realize about all the Aniquity Period Pieces how everyone's got the stateliest King's English going on in the way they talk, when, well, that may not have even been CLOSE to the way Romans/etc would've sounded in the original tongue. The whole patois of the speech was probably nothing of the sort.

    Sometimes I wonder if Julius Caesar's whole cadence and meter would be more along the lines of, say, some guy from Kentucky. It's the sort of thing we just won't ever know.

    He'd sound vaguely Italian.

    Not quite, actually. When Rome fell, the people in power hired Plutarch to make a new language because people were done with the tongue of the empire. So he prettymuch crafted the Italian language to with the intent of being very unlike whatever they were using in Rome before.

    I mean, it was Romantic so it fed off a lot of the Iberian and Gaul dialects in terms of structure, so it wasn't all new, but...yeah. Italian didn't exist during the actual Roman Empire.

    Well, the Norwegians tried to create a 'new' language when they became independent from Denmark but 125 years later most still write and speak the old language. Dialect might be a better word for it instead of language.

    I'm also guessing that the fact that Latin-Americans pronounce Spanish differently from the actual Spaniard would mean that while the language may change, the pronouncement stay pretty close, so that Italian is most likely pronounced much like they pronounced Latin.

    Than again, I don't speak any of the four languages I just mentioned so I might just be talking out of my ass. Just like in movies!! (Got that back on topic, oh yeah)

    That's not particularly true. Latin scholars are pretty sure that the Catholic Church pronounces all its Latin wrong because the church is strongly influenced by the dominance of Italians.

    Also, I watched a recording of the last stage production of Rent, and is it just me or does the movie seem to be pushing the view that the poor are poor by choice and are no good layabouts and terrible people?

    Bagginses on
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Say The Social Network tonight. Damn good movie.

  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    shryke wrote: »
    Say The Social Network tonight. Damn good movie.

    How did you feel about Rashida Jones' character?

    I felt like she was there just to explain Zuckerberg's characterization to the audience, which I found a little insulting.

    Robos A Go Go on
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Say The Social Network tonight. Damn good movie.

    How did you feel about Rashida Jones' character?

    I felt like she was there just to explain Zuckerberg's characterization to the audience, which I found a little insulting.

    She didn't explain much at all.

    She mostly seemed there as someone Zuckerberg could talk to in the deposition timeline so we could get some back and forth and see what Zuckerberg was thinking and as a way to easily explain the ultimate outcome of the whole mess to the audience (through Zuckerberg)

  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Say The Social Network tonight. Damn good movie.

    How did you feel about Rashida Jones' character?

    I felt like she was there just to explain Zuckerberg's characterization to the audience, which I found a little insulting.

    She didn't explain much at all.

    She mostly seemed there as someone Zuckerberg could talk to in the deposition timeline so we could get some back and forth and see what Zuckerberg was thinking and as a way to easily explain the ultimate outcome of the whole mess to the audience (through Zuckerberg)

    At times, she seems more like a therapist than a random legal associate.
    Spoiler:

    Why on Earth would someone in her position speak so intimately with someone she's just met, much less attempt to summarize his motivations and foibles for him? Is she speaking for his benefit or for the audience's?

    Robos A Go Go on
  • AstaerethAstaereth Registered User regular
    She's obviously a plot device, but I think people confuse her last line as the conclusion of the film's views on the character, rather than just one more opinion.

    Find more of my writing at The Thieves' Den.
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    Astaereth wrote: »
    She's obviously a plot device, but I think people confuse her last line as the conclusion of the film's views on the character, rather than just one more opinion.

    The last words on the protagonist delivered immediately before the conclusion aren't just going to be some minor character's opinion. If her assessment didn't carry more heft than that, then it wouldn't be worth hearing at that point when the audience has already developed its own impressions of Zuckerberg.

  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    Astaereth wrote: »
    She's obviously a plot device, but I think people confuse her last line as the conclusion of the film's views on the character, rather than just one more opinion.

    The last words on the protagonist delivered immediately before the conclusion aren't just going to be some minor character's opinion. If her assessment didn't carry more heft than that, then it wouldn't be worth hearing at that point when the audience has already developed its own impressions of Zuckerberg.

  • AstaerethAstaereth Registered User regular
    I think it's a flaw in the movie that they didn't undercut her opinion at all. Or if you like, it's a flaw in the movie that she baldly states the author's view. I prefer the way Citizen Kane handles it: "I don't think any one thing could explain a man's life..."

    Find more of my writing at The Thieves' Den.
  • VariableVariable Ted Hitler Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    I'm not certain I agree with the use of the character, but I think when you're dealing with an actual living person and you're a director who's opinion is not negative (or at least mostly not negative iirc from the commentary) it becomes a reasonable choice.

    BNet-Vari#1998 | WiiU-Variable | 3DS-3866-8105-7478 | Steam | Twitch
    Sig%20-%20Hearthstone%20DoA.png
  • GrisloGrislo Registered User regular
    Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I feel that when discussing specifics of movies, and actually quoting last lines, a spoiler tag might be in order.

    They're really easy to use too. I'd be happy to tell people how they're used, if anyone is in doubt.

    This post was sponsored by LG.

    'Get your fucking finger on the wookie'
  • GreasyKidsStuffGreasyKidsStuff Registered User regular
    Just watched The Dead Zone. Overall, a big 'meh'. I understand it's regarded as the best Stephen King adaptation but I can't help but disagree. Granted, I haven't read the book. But I was underwhelmed. I found Walken's performance was hokey, a lot of the dialogue was poorly performed, and while this probably has more to do with King's writing, the plot was... predictable. I was waiting for a twist, something to make this guy's ability more intriguing. Something to dig into. What I got was hardly the case. It presented this big moral dilemma at the end but it got glossed over way too quickly for my taste.

    I also felt like it wasn't suited to Cronenberg's talents. Knowing this was part of the same run of films that included Videodrome and The Fly, I'm wondering why this film failed to engage me the way those do.

    That's three films I've watched recently now where I'm left wanting more. I need to break this streak soon.

    http://twitter.com/#!/dirtylonghair - My Twitter / GT: GreasyKidsStuff / NNID: GreasyKidsStuff / 3DS Friend Code: 4828 5290 8757 / Digital Comics Codes
  • Good Looking Fat GuyGood Looking Fat Guy Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    I just saw Moneyball. It was frustrating to watch. Billy Beane seemed like a hypocrite. He criticized the talent scouts for outdated thinking and being closeminded to new ways of doing their jobs. However, Beane was just as stubborn and unwilling to compromise. Whenever someone tried to explain their diasgreement with Beane, he just dismissed them outright.

    Compromise is essential for anything to function in society. I couldn't get past Billy Beane's unwillingness to incorporate elements of both schools of baseball management.

    Certainly both methods have assets and flaws. I was annoyed by the implication that SABR-metrics was infallible and the old-fashioned ways were completely flawed. Both ways have merit.

    Good Looking Fat Guy on
  • DanHibikiDanHibiki Registered User regular
    So saw 21 jump street over the weekend. Fun movie, and completely tongue in cheek, which is what makes this movie work. Stupid stuff like "huh... why didn't that gasoline truck explode?" worked well.

    And I saw Wrath of the Titans. It was a blast, I have no idea why people are bashing it so hard. Needed more of Zeus and Hades' Jedi buddies force blasting demons and Bill Nighy missed a chance to say"do you fear death" again.
    Toby Kebbell was also a surprise.

    bar_zps02bac615.jpg
  • gjaustingjaustin Registered User regular
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    And I saw Wrath of the Titans. It was a blast, I have no idea why people are bashing it so hard. Needed more of Zeus and Hades' Jedi buddies force blasting demons and Bill Nighy missed a chance to say"do you fear death" again.
    Toby Kebbell was also a surprise.

    I agree. It was entertaining to watch and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I had the same reaction as when I saw Snakes on a Plane. That it was an ultimately forgettable movie, but it gave me exactly what I expected!


    On average, I'd say it was a little better than John Carter, simply because it was acceptable through the entire run, instead of jumping between awful and awesome like John Carter.

    Your belief is not required
  • OakeyOakey UKRegistered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Grislo wrote: »
    Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I feel that when discussing specifics of movies, and actually quoting last lines, a spoiler tag might be in order.

    They're really easy to use too. I'd be happy to tell people how they're used, if anyone is in doubt.

    I don't want to spoil it for you but...
    Spoiler:

    Oakey on
    steam_sig.png
  • a5ehrena5ehren AtlantaRegistered User regular
    I just saw Moneyball. It was frustrating to watch. Billy Beane seemed like a hypocrite. He criticized the talent scouts for outdated thinking and being closeminded to new ways of doing their jobs. However, Beane was just as stubborn and unwilling to compromise. Whenever someone tried to explain their diasgreement with Beane, he just dismissed them outright.

    Compromise is essential for anything to function in society. I couldn't get past Billy Beane's unwillingness to incorporate elements of both schools of baseball management.

    Certainly both methods have assets and flaws. I was annoyed by the implication that SABR-metrics was infallible and the old-fashioned ways were completely flawed. Both ways have merit.

    The movie kind of portrays the two camps in the way it was going down in the early 2000s. Modern front offices (well the good ones, anyway), including Beane himself in Oakland, now take an approach that combines the two.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Say The Social Network tonight. Damn good movie.

    How did you feel about Rashida Jones' character?

    I felt like she was there just to explain Zuckerberg's characterization to the audience, which I found a little insulting.

    She didn't explain much at all.

    She mostly seemed there as someone Zuckerberg could talk to in the deposition timeline so we could get some back and forth and see what Zuckerberg was thinking and as a way to easily explain the ultimate outcome of the whole mess to the audience (through Zuckerberg)

    At times, she seems more like a therapist than a random legal associate.
    Spoiler:

    Why on Earth would someone in her position speak so intimately with someone she's just met, much less attempt to summarize his motivations and foibles for him? Is she speaking for his benefit or for the audience's?

    I don't see why the spoiled part counts at all. That's more a catch-all for the movies "this isn't exactly the truth, just a story" premise.

    The last one is just her position. She doesn't think he's a bad guy (he treats her very nicely in their few conversations and is very polite and all that) ... and yet he's involved in some truly dickish reprehensible things.

    Her last line isn't a summary of his motivations because it doesn't explain them. It never touches on why he does what he does. It's just a summary of his actions. He's a nice guy who does really dickish things.

    What her comment doesn't answer and what the movie seems to want us to think about is why he did that shit.


    And I think that's the interesting question even in real life cause around all the story-telling going on, the facts of the actual case are still there. In real life, it's even more confusing why everything went down the way it did.

  • GrisloGrislo Registered User regular
    Oakey wrote: »
    Grislo wrote: »
    Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I feel that when discussing specifics of movies, and actually quoting last lines, a spoiler tag might be in order.

    They're really easy to use too. I'd be happy to tell people how they're used, if anyone is in doubt.

    I don't want to spoil it for you but...
    Spoiler:

    No shit?

    Knowing the broad strokes of something doesn't mean you know the movie, especially not if it's an even remotely decently made movie.

    That line of argument might make sense if Fincher had made a straight up documentary detailing the events.

    This post was sponsored by LG.

    'Get your fucking finger on the wookie'
  • VariableVariable Ted Hitler Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    I just saw Moneyball. It was frustrating to watch. Billy Beane seemed like a hypocrite. He criticized the talent scouts for outdated thinking and being closeminded to new ways of doing their jobs. However, Beane was just as stubborn and unwilling to compromise. Whenever someone tried to explain their diasgreement with Beane, he just dismissed them outright.

    Compromise is essential for anything to function in society. I couldn't get past Billy Beane's unwillingness to incorporate elements of both schools of baseball management.

    Certainly both methods have assets and flaws. I was annoyed by the implication that SABR-metrics was infallible and the old-fashioned ways were completely flawed. Both ways have merit.

    it seemed like it worked

    and the old ways that they showed included judging players based on names and faces. I don't really think there's room to compromise between statsstatsstats and random elements we choose to look at with a given player. that's the point.

    BNet-Vari#1998 | WiiU-Variable | 3DS-3866-8105-7478 | Steam | Twitch
    Sig%20-%20Hearthstone%20DoA.png
  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    Variable wrote: »
    I just saw Moneyball. It was frustrating to watch. Billy Beane seemed like a hypocrite. He criticized the talent scouts for outdated thinking and being closeminded to new ways of doing their jobs. However, Beane was just as stubborn and unwilling to compromise. Whenever someone tried to explain their diasgreement with Beane, he just dismissed them outright.

    Compromise is essential for anything to function in society. I couldn't get past Billy Beane's unwillingness to incorporate elements of both schools of baseball management.

    Certainly both methods have assets and flaws. I was annoyed by the implication that SABR-metrics was infallible and the old-fashioned ways were completely flawed. Both ways have merit.

    it seemed like it worked

    and the old ways that they showed included judging players based on names and faces. I don't really think there's room to compromise between statsstatsstats and random elements we choose to look at with a given player. that's the point.

    Also wasn't it important to the plan that it be implemented completely or not at all? I got the impression that it wouldn't work unless they committed to it whole-hog.

    Although if teams are using a hybrid version now then I guess that's not true.

  • VariableVariable Ted Hitler Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    it might be true if you're trying to make a point, though. and again, it worked pretty well.

    from the movie I got that he was one of if not the first guy to be doing that. he had to make a stand.

    but I don't know (and I mean I truly don't know, not that I don't believe it) how you really mix the two. the stats guys turn their heads when you make half your choices or what?

    BNet-Vari#1998 | WiiU-Variable | 3DS-3866-8105-7478 | Steam | Twitch
    Sig%20-%20Hearthstone%20DoA.png
  • elkataselkatas Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Trailer for Total Recall



    You know, it doesn't look too shitty, and it seems to follow original story more faithfully (no Mars, for example). Still, CGI looks cheap.

    elkatas on
    Hypnotically inclined.
  • DeaderinredDeaderinred Registered User regular
    get your ass to mars.

  • Disco11Disco11 Registered User regular
    So just saw Source code. Good little movie.

    steam_sig.png
    gamertag: Canadianllama
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    I enjoyed Source Code. Though I called the "twist" in like, the first 5 minutes.

    Steam: DigitalArcanist | PSN: DigitalArcanist | NNID: DigitalArcanist | Backloggery: Houn
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    The final twist was awful and really detracted from the film.
    Spoiler:

  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    I saw The Raid: Redemption on Saturday at the local indie theatre.

    It was basically Aliens meets A Better Tomorrow II on the set of Attack the Block.

    I liken the carnage level to what happens when you start fucking with one of Tony Jaa's elephants.

    Which his to say: "It is good."

    Dracomicron on
    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
  • GreasyKidsStuffGreasyKidsStuff Registered User regular
    I didn't mind the twist ending in Source Code, I just didn't like how
    Spoiler:

    http://twitter.com/#!/dirtylonghair - My Twitter / GT: GreasyKidsStuff / NNID: GreasyKidsStuff / 3DS Friend Code: 4828 5290 8757 / Digital Comics Codes
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    I didn't mind the twist ending in Source Code, I just didn't like how
    Spoiler:
    Spoiler:

  • TychoCelchuuuTychoCelchuuu ___________PIGEON _________San Diego, CA Registered User regular
    I didn't mind the twist ending in Source Code, I just didn't like how
    Spoiler:
    Spoiler:
    That's precisely what happened. I mean I suppose in a way it's not too bad:
    Spoiler:

    I enjoyed Source Code, and I didn't have much of a problem with the ending (although I can see why people would feel otherwise). What annoyed me about the movie was how much better it could've been.
    Spoiler:

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    I didn't mind the twist ending in Source Code, I just didn't like how
    Spoiler:
    Spoiler:
    That's precisely what happened. I mean I suppose in a way it's not too bad:
    Spoiler:

    I enjoyed Source Code, and I didn't have much of a problem with the ending (although I can see why people would feel otherwise). What annoyed me about the movie was how much better it could've been.
    Spoiler:

    Maybe the creators did want to go in that direction but the investors didn't. Avatar did the same thing, only I doubt Cameron had any intention of fleshing out Jake's story beyond
    Spoiler:

  • TychoCelchuuuTychoCelchuuu ___________PIGEON _________San Diego, CA Registered User regular
    Yeah I mean I dunno why movies turn out the way they do rather than some other way, and I'm sure that plenty of stuff turns to shit for reasons that aren't at all the writer's fault or the director's fault. Source Code just seemed particularly ripe for excellence beyond what it provided.

  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    Spoiler:

This discussion has been closed.