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

1212224262799

Posts

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    KalTorak wrote: »
    Sigh... the Magneto/Xavier parts of First Class do make me a bit sad for what could have been.

    You don't want an unrestrained Goyer. That way lies madness. It's how we ended up with Nightstalkers Blade: Trinity.

    Well, yeah. Not so much Goyer, but for how great a Magneto/Xavier focused movie could have been. If they'd stretched out and explored that relationship over a trilogy instead of rushing through it? With McAvoy and Fassbender? Could have been incredible.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    KalTorak wrote: »
    KalTorak wrote: »
    Sigh... the Magneto/Xavier parts of First Class do make me a bit sad for what could have been.

    You don't want an unrestrained Goyer. That way lies madness. It's how we ended up with Nightstalkers Blade: Trinity.

    Well, yeah. Not so much Goyer, but for how great a Magneto/Xavier focused movie could have been. If they'd stretched out and explored that relationship over a trilogy instead of rushing through it? With McAvoy and Fassbender? Could have been incredible.

    Agreed.

  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    Shawnasee wrote: »
    So you like Temple of Doom but hate Hunger Games? I've never felt the need to insert this into any internet/text conversation but I really think "smh" fits well in this scenario...

    I also like powdered doughnuts while detesting Brussels sprouts, even though they're both foods.



    Weird.

  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    Blade: Trinity is the only movie that I've paid to see that I've ever walked out of because it was so awful.

  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    Temple of Doom is a fun Indiana Jones film, and I'm also at a loss as to why it's the most detested. Especially seeing as they always use the one sleeveless Jones photo from it in advertising, it's the film that gave us the tagline, "If adventure has a name..." and almost everything that's made for the property ties into it (all the modern video games, the Disney rides, etc.).

    The Indiana Jones series also conforms to the idea that most trilogies (with some rare exceptions) exist with a quality commensurate with their release with decreasing returns as you go, nowadays ending up with an abysmal fourth installment (like Pirates of the Caribbean or Alien).

  • FencingsaxFencingsax Bondage Discipline Spider-Man Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    gjaustin wrote: »
    An Alias style opening with disguises and subterfuge would actually have been better. At least then we'd be seeing her do something that the other characters couldn't, whereas it's hard to see busting up generic goons as impressive when everyone else is knocking dragons out of the sky.

    Every time I see the trailer, I go:

    "So you have a group with a genius in a man-shaped flying tank, a super-soldier, a rage monster, and a Norse god. And then a dude with a bow and a lady with a gun?"

    I know dick about the Avengers as a property, but off the top of my head, the dude with the bow and the chick with the gun could be useful as spies or assassins. None of the other guys are especially good at "covert". Anyway, this same complaint could be leveled at any superhero team. X-Men, Justice League, whatever - you have the heavy hitters and the also-rans.

    That said, I am baffled by the degree to which a disembodied 40-second clip of a girl doing martial arts says much of anything about anything. People who were otherwise interested in the flick writing it off based on that strike me as exceptionally silly.

    Part of the problem is that the blocking is... not AAA movie quality.

    It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Temple of Doom I just never found as enjoyable. There's something missing in there that made the 1st and 3rd movie so damn fun to watch but I can't quite pin it down.

    It's still a GOOD movie though, imo. Just not up to the quality of the other 2.

  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Temple of Doom I just never found as enjoyable. There's something missing in there that made the 1st and 3rd movie so damn fun to watch but I can't quite pin it down.

    It's still a GOOD movie though, imo. Just not up to the quality of the other 2.

    I'd say it's probably because the stakes are fairly low compared to the rest of the franchise ("small village of missing children in India" <<<< "God is going to murder everyone on the planet"), and the film takes quite a dark turn in the third act with the blood-drinking and heart-ripping and child-torturing.

    I don't know I'd say it's my favorite in the series, it's just that I find it plenty enjoyable.

  • ShawnaseeShawnasee Registered User regular
    I think you just like to be contrary AR but I do agree with you about Blade: Trinity.

    And that may be the last time that ever happens.

    Chanus wrote: »

    Your wang is a better man than you.
  • ThirithThirith Registered User regular
    My problem is that what should be dark actually comes across as cheesy. As I said earlier, it felt like a boy (16 is probably way too old... more like 11, 12) wrote the script, trying to gross out one of his friends.

    Eagles on Pogo Sticks: Musings of a Goofy Beast
    http://goofybeast.wordpress.com
  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    Shawnasee wrote: »
    I think you just like to be contrary AR but I do agree with you about Blade: Trinity.

    And that may be the last time that ever happens.

    I don't like to be contrary. I just like to carefully articulate my opinions and defend them at endless length.

    :D

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    also anyone who says that Blade: Trinity isn't terrible is just a bad person with wrong opinions.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Blade 1 was good except the ending, which was silly and ridiculous.

    None of the others were anything but shit.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Blade 1 was good except the ending, which was silly and ridiculous.

    None of the others were anything but shit.

    Blade 2 was excellent IMO.

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    Blade 2 would have been better if... I dunno, it hadn't ignored every hook from Blade 1.

    Blade is starting to resist the serum - this is a problem! No it's not, he's fine.
    Blade's new companion in the war on vampires is a smart lady scientist! Nope, she's gone too.
    Blade's father figure was killed by vampires, bet he's pissed about that! Nope, Whistler's back.
    Frost was walking around during the day, vampires are starting to get around the whole sunlight thi-NOPE.

  • Linespider5Linespider5 I told her on Alderaan nothing else was going on.Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Blade 1 was good except the ending, which was silly and ridiculous.

    None of the others were anything but shit.

    I love the ending of Blade. Every time I see it when Stephen Dorff explodes,
    Spoiler:

    bqv5944776sm.png
  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Blade 1 was good except the ending, which was silly and ridiculous.

    None of the others were anything but shit.

    I love the ending of Blade. Every time I see it when Stephen Dorff explodes,
    Spoiler:

    Also the pre-asskicking line is wonderfully nonsensical.

    "Some muthafucker's always tryin' to ice-skate uphill!"

    What. the fuck. does that MEAN.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Blade 1 was good except the ending, which was silly and ridiculous.

    None of the others were anything but shit.

    Blade 2 was excellent IMO.

    That's because you have bad taste.

    Blade 2 is shit right from the start, where they hit the reset button in the stupidest way I've ever seen.

    And then it's all downhill from there.

    Also their desperate attempts to copy the Matrix were sad. Blade 1 had it's own style.

  • Linespider5Linespider5 I told her on Alderaan nothing else was going on.Registered User regular
    KalTorak wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Blade 1 was good except the ending, which was silly and ridiculous.

    None of the others were anything but shit.

    I love the ending of Blade. Every time I see it when Stephen Dorff explodes,
    Spoiler:

    Also the pre-asskicking line is wonderfully nonsensical.

    "Some muthafucker's always tryin' to ice-skate uphill!"

    What. the fuck. does that MEAN.

    Technically he's right. You can't ice-skate uphill.

    bqv5944776sm.png
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Blade 1 was good except the ending, which was silly and ridiculous.

    None of the others were anything but shit.

    Blade 2 was excellent IMO.

    That's because you have bad taste.

    Blade 2 is shit right from the start, where they hit the reset button in the stupidest way I've ever seen.

    It's true the film shouldn't have bought back
    Spoiler:
    Despite that I thought they did a good job exploiting how he changed the new status quo Blade set up after Blade 1.
    And then it's all downhill from there.

    Also their desperate attempts to copy the Matrix were sad. Blade 1 had it's own style.

    What did it copy from the Matrix?

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

    People who think Guillermo del Toro is vastly overrated and people who think he's a genius both often point to Blade 2 as their exhibit of defense.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Bullet-time spiny cam. And the fights in general just felt less kinetic.

    It's been awhile though, I don't remember the exact parts.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    A funny thing:

    People who think Guillermo del Toro is vastly overrated and people who think he's a genius both often point to Blade 2 as their exhibit of defense.

    I tend to point to the Hellboy movies.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    A funny thing:

    People who think Guillermo del Toro is vastly overrated and people who think he's a genius both often point to Blade 2 as their exhibit of defense.

    While it is a good film Blade 2 is not the best example for his genius. The Hellboy films or Pan's Labyrinth are superior examples.

  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    For me, del Toro is quickly falling into the category of "Director whose films are just as good with the dialogue turned off."

    He can go sit next to Tarsem Singh and James Cameron.

  • gjaustingjaustin Registered User regular
    KalTorak wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Blade 1 was good except the ending, which was silly and ridiculous.

    None of the others were anything but shit.

    I love the ending of Blade. Every time I see it when Stephen Dorff explodes,
    Spoiler:

    Also the pre-asskicking line is wonderfully nonsensical.

    "Some muthafucker's always tryin' to ice-skate uphill!"

    What. the fuck. does that MEAN.

    I had forgotten that. It IS a great line.

    Your belief is not required
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    gjaustin wrote: »
    KalTorak wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Blade 1 was good except the ending, which was silly and ridiculous.

    None of the others were anything but shit.

    I love the ending of Blade. Every time I see it when Stephen Dorff explodes,
    Spoiler:

    Also the pre-asskicking line is wonderfully nonsensical.

    "Some muthafucker's always tryin' to ice-skate uphill!"

    What. the fuck. does that MEAN.

    I had forgotten that. It IS a great line.

    It wasn't in the original script. Someone heard Wesley say it on set one day, the director loved it and they added the line to the film.

    Harry Dresden on
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    For me, del Toro is quickly falling into the category of "Director whose films are just as good with the dialogue turned off."

    He can go sit next to Tarsem Singh and James Cameron.

    I didn't even know he directed Blade 2 till you mentioned it just now.


    But yeah, I was about to say the same kinda thing about the Hellboy films. Both are fairly pretty to look at, but there's nothing else there imo. The action is ok but not great. The worst offender though is the script. The plots were shite and never gave any of the goings on a sense of emotional weight.

    It was like he desperately wanted me to care about some theme or such in the movie, but had no clue how to set that up and thus everything felt throw away and never connected with me.


    It's like, I remember Hellboy 2 where they kill a big plant thing. And the movie seems to say we should feel bad that Hellboy just killed this giant plant thing ... but we've got no reason to . It came out of nowhere, got blowed up within minutes and that's it. There's no emotional resonance here.

  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    For me, del Toro is quickly falling into the category of "Director whose films are just as good with the dialogue turned off."

    He can go sit next to Tarsem Singh and James Cameron.

    I didn't even know he directed Blade 2 till you mentioned it just now.


    But yeah, I was about to say the same kinda thing about the Hellboy films. Both are fairly pretty to look at, but there's nothing else there imo. The action is ok but not great. The worst offender though is the script. The plots were shite and never gave any of the goings on a sense of emotional weight.

    It was like he desperately wanted me to care about some theme or such in the movie, but had no clue how to set that up and thus everything felt throw away and never connected with me.


    It's like, I remember Hellboy 2 where they kill a big plant thing. And the movie seems to say we should feel bad that Hellboy just killed this giant plant thing ... but we've got no reason to . It came out of nowhere, got blowed up within minutes and that's it. There's no emotional resonance here.

    Yeah, narrative structure and engaging dynamics are not his speciality. His movies tend to be in the formula of, "things happen for a while, and then the credits roll."

    And honestly, as great as his use of practical effects can be (and they can be very, very great), the rest of his filmcraft falls a little short. His blocking is rote and pedestrian, his palettes are all over the place, and he doesn't use the camera all that often to visually impart narrative information. He just tries to overwhelm with design, and it all ends up looking a bit samey after a while.

  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    For me, del Toro is quickly falling into the category of "Director whose films are just as good with the dialogue turned off."

    He can go sit next to Tarsem Singh and James Cameron.

    I didn't even know he directed Blade 2 till you mentioned it just now.


    But yeah, I was about to say the same kinda thing about the Hellboy films. Both are fairly pretty to look at, but there's nothing else there imo. The action is ok but not great. The worst offender though is the script. The plots were shite and never gave any of the goings on a sense of emotional weight.

    It was like he desperately wanted me to care about some theme or such in the movie, but had no clue how to set that up and thus everything felt throw away and never connected with me.


    It's like, I remember Hellboy 2 where they kill a big plant thing. And the movie seems to say we should feel bad that Hellboy just killed this giant plant thing ... but we've got no reason to . It came out of nowhere, got blowed up within minutes and that's it. There's no emotional resonance here.

    Yeah, narrative structure and engaging dynamics are not his speciality. His movies tend to be in the formula of, "things happen for a while, and then the credits roll."

    And honestly, as great as his use of practical effects can be (and they can be very, very great), the rest of his filmcraft falls a little short. His blocking is rote and pedestrian, his palettes are all over the place, and he doesn't use the camera all that often to visually impart narrative information. He just tries to overwhelm with design, and it all ends up looking a bit samey after a while.

    It sounds like you're describing Tim Burton.

  • AstaerethAstaereth Registered User regular
    On the subject of the guy with the bow having a place in the Avengers alongside the superpowerful dudes, a blogger illuminates:
    Who is Hawkeye? If you haven't read many Avengers comics, you might not have a good handle on his character. After all, he has never been able to support a solo book, he's never been a particularly prolific guest star, and he hasn't really done much of anything in the last ten years other than die and come back as a ninja (sigh). But it's absolutely vital to understand two things about him: 1) he's not Green Arrow and 2) he's kind of an asshole.

    ...

    Hawkeye grew up a poor orphan, a boy who literally ran away to join the circus and learned everything he needed at the feet of some extremely dubious characters. For Hawkeye, being an Avenger is the best job in the world, certainly more than almost anyone else in his position could ever have dreamed of accomplishing. Whenever he's left the team - to have his own "hard traveling hero" moments, or to gain perspective on whatever recent setback he suffered - it's always been temporary, and often when he's left the main Avengers group it's been for the purpose of founding or joining another group, such as the West Coast Avengers or the Thunderbolts.

    ...

    On the most elementary level, this is Group Dynamics 101: if you're writing a group - any group - you need to have one member who is excessively abrasive and undeniably unpleasant, someone for the rest of the group to spark against and to incite interpersonal conflict. But there's more to it than that. Hawkeye starts off as a wild-card, a former criminal who bluffs his way onto the Avengers by breaking into the team's headquarters and tying up the butler. He becomes part of the famous "Cap's Kooky Quartet" incarnation of the team, alongside Captain America, Quicksilver, and the Scarlet Witch.

    At the outset, Hawkeye didn't get along with anyone. He resented Cap's experience and command, he took an instant dislike to Quicksilver's officious egotism, and insisted on putting the moves on the Scarlet Witch even though it made her brother see red. Remember: Hawkeye started out as a crook. He was tricked into theft and espionage by the Black Widow, who was using her sex as a means of controlling the archer. (This was back in 1964, mind you!) He barges his way into the Avengers based on nothing more than his facility with a bow and arrow and an absolutely enormous pair of brass balls.

    ...

    This has been the one constant of Hawkeye's character from his very earliest appearances. How else do you think that a normal dude, with just a bow and some fancy trick arrows, could ever actually believe he was worthy to stand next to the likes of Thor, Captain America, and Iron Man - a Norse god who can level mountains with a throw of his magic hammer, a super-soldier who fought in World War II, and a brilliant engineer who was able to build the most powerful suit of armor on the planet out of old car parts and transistor radios while bleeding to death in a bamboo shack in Vietnam? The answer to this question is that Hawkeye gets to stand next to the most powerful beings on the planet simply because he's earned the right to be there. He simply doesn't quit: even after all these years he's still got something to prove. He'll always have something to prove. He covers it up with jokes and an attitude, but he's got an absolutely indomitable will, and alongside it a willingness to do anything - even cheat! - to win the day.

    It's worth clicking through to the post just to see the comics page where Hawkeye actually bluffs his way onto the Avengers.
    shryke wrote: »
    For me, del Toro is quickly falling into the category of "Director whose films are just as good with the dialogue turned off."

    He can go sit next to Tarsem Singh and James Cameron.

    I didn't even know he directed Blade 2 till you mentioned it just now.


    But yeah, I was about to say the same kinda thing about the Hellboy films. Both are fairly pretty to look at, but there's nothing else there imo. The action is ok but not great. The worst offender though is the script. The plots were shite and never gave any of the goings on a sense of emotional weight.

    It was like he desperately wanted me to care about some theme or such in the movie, but had no clue how to set that up and thus everything felt throw away and never connected with me.


    It's like, I remember Hellboy 2 where they kill a big plant thing. And the movie seems to say we should feel bad that Hellboy just killed this giant plant thing ... but we've got no reason to . It came out of nowhere, got blowed up within minutes and that's it. There's no emotional resonance here.

    Yeah, narrative structure and engaging dynamics are not his speciality. His movies tend to be in the formula of, "things happen for a while, and then the credits roll."

    And honestly, as great as his use of practical effects can be (and they can be very, very great), the rest of his filmcraft falls a little short. His blocking is rote and pedestrian, his palettes are all over the place, and he doesn't use the camera all that often to visually impart narrative information. He just tries to overwhelm with design, and it all ends up looking a bit samey after a while.

    Have you seen The Devil's Backbone, AR? As someone with a lot of the same complaints about del Toro, I thought that was one of his best.

    Find more of my writing at The Thieves' Den.
  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    Astaereth wrote: »
    Have you seen The Devil's Backbone, AR? As someone with a lot of the same complaints about del Toro, I thought that was one of his best.

    I really liked this one as well. Guillermo seems to be the type of director who does good work with his own original material, but has increasingly bad returns when playing in other people's sandboxes.

  • Xenogear_0001Xenogear_0001 Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Temple of Doom is a fun Indiana Jones film, and I'm also at a loss as to why it's the most detested. Especially seeing as they always use the one sleeveless Jones photo from it in advertising, it's the film that gave us the tagline, "If adventure has a name..." and almost everything that's made for the property ties into it (all the modern video games, the Disney rides, etc.).

    The Indiana Jones series also conforms to the idea that most trilogies (with some rare exceptions) exist with a quality commensurate with their release with decreasing returns as you go, nowadays ending up with an abysmal fourth installment (like Pirates of the Caribbean or Alien).

    Hey, whatever, man--I fucking loved Last Crusade. Adding Sean Connery to the cast really helped flesh the whole thing out, in my mind. Meanwhile, in Temple, you've got Short-Round and the director's girlfriend/wife(?)--shrill harpy that she is.

    If anything, I thought Star Wars started that idea.

    EDIT: Whoops, forgot the quote I was responding to.

    Xenogear_0001 on
    steam_sig.png
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Just got Pan's Labirynth from the library so I'll give that a try, see what I think of del Toro #3. (4?)

    shryke on
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Bullet-time spiny cam. And the fights in general just felt less kinetic.

    It's been awhile though, I don't remember the exact parts.

    Which is funny, because when the Matrix came out, I read reviews that compared it unfavorably to Blade1.

    There is a scene in Blade1 where Blade shoots at Frost and Frost dodges in semi-bullet-time. Its when they meet in the daytime.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • Linespider5Linespider5 I told her on Alderaan nothing else was going on.Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    For me, del Toro is quickly falling into the category of "Director whose films are just as good with the dialogue turned off."

    He can go sit next to Tarsem Singh and James Cameron.

    I didn't even know he directed Blade 2 till you mentioned it just now.


    But yeah, I was about to say the same kinda thing about the Hellboy films. Both are fairly pretty to look at, but there's nothing else there imo. The action is ok but not great. The worst offender though is the script. The plots were shite and never gave any of the goings on a sense of emotional weight.

    It was like he desperately wanted me to care about some theme or such in the movie, but had no clue how to set that up and thus everything felt throw away and never connected with me.


    It's like, I remember Hellboy 2 where they kill a big plant thing. And the movie seems to say we should feel bad that Hellboy just killed this giant plant thing ... but we've got no reason to . It came out of nowhere, got blowed up within minutes and that's it. There's no emotional resonance here.

    Yeah, narrative structure and engaging dynamics are not his speciality. His movies tend to be in the formula of, "things happen for a while, and then the credits roll."

    And honestly, as great as his use of practical effects can be (and they can be very, very great), the rest of his filmcraft falls a little short. His blocking is rote and pedestrian, his palettes are all over the place, and he doesn't use the camera all that often to visually impart narrative information. He just tries to overwhelm with design, and it all ends up looking a bit samey after a while.

    Sometimes I find Del Toro irritating, particularly when he boasts about making Da Vinci style notebooks for each movie project filled with illustrations and writings he did himself, and the whole need to build himself a home with secret passages and jars full of dead things in preservative fluids.

    Because he's such a creative mastermind, you see.

    I generally hate people that make their entire life into some kind of product via earnest self-parody.

    bqv5944776sm.png
  • GodfatherGodfather Registered User regular
    So I finally got around to seeing Akira for the first time. I want opinions on the flick from seasoned film board critics like Atomic Toss and so forth.

    I thought it was a somewhat nonsensical plot with mediocre character design coupled with astounding animation and music/atmosphere. I don't really know how to feel about it!

    0WBv0.png
  • Linespider5Linespider5 I told her on Alderaan nothing else was going on.Registered User regular
    I've had the Akira Metal Box in my house for years now and have never played it. I just liked having it there.

    Maybe it's time. Akira does have a lot going for it. Most of the time.

    bqv5944776sm.png
  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    It sounds like you're describing Tim Burton.

    Maybe, but at least Burton knows how to work with actors.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Godfather wrote: »
    So I finally got around to seeing Akira for the first time. I want opinions on the flick from seasoned film board critics like Atomic Toss and so forth.

    I thought it was a somewhat nonsensical plot with mediocre character design coupled with astounding animation and music/atmosphere. I don't really know how to feel about it!

    Yeah that was about my thoughts.

This discussion has been closed.