Although, I would have liked "The Battle of Los Angeles" more than "BATTLE: LOS ANGELES IN BOLD FONT YEAH"
NotASenator on
0
Options
ZoelI suppose... I'd put it onRegistered Userregular
edited January 2011
Eh.
Still not convinced enough to see it sight unseen. Slightly more receptive to seeing it after people see it and confirm it doesn't suck. The theatrical trailer leads me to believe there's way too much buildup for a concept that doesn't warrant much explanation
And, this is just a personal peeve
I am sick and tired of aliens invading us because they want our resources. Couldn't they invade us for a slightly off kilter reason once in a while, like, I dunno
Humans must die because their culture is awful and they wont stop fucking broadcasting their cricket games across the galaxy and our race is highly sensitive to radio transmissions
Zoel on
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
0
Options
ZoelI suppose... I'd put it onRegistered Userregular
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
How the hell would you see a movie in any way except sight unseen
After seeing a review?
Gotta admit that it doesn't help that I already know the ending because the US Army helped make it.
Zoel on
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
Well we don't really know if they're going straight for resources. I mean that's just one guy's line in the trailer. Also it's the most believable reason so I am perfectly fine with it.
Plus I'm pretty sure the US military always contributes in some way when you make a film depicting their troops so...
Gatsby on
0
Options
ZoelI suppose... I'd put it onRegistered Userregular
edited January 2011
Nah they refuse if the military is shown in any sort of negative light
Which basically means they refuse if anyone breaks protocol or has any sort of ethical lapse whatsoever, and generally they don't help you if the united states loses unless you're documenting an actual historical battle where the united states lost.
Zoel on
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
0
Options
DepressperadoI just wanted to see you laughingin the pizza rainRegistered Userregular
Nah they refuse if the military is shown in any sort of negative light
Which basically means they refuse if anyone breaks protocol or has any sort of ethical lapse whatsoever, and generally they don't help you if the united states loses unless you're documenting an actual historical battle where the united states lost.
Ah fair enough
well even so, if this is a well made action film about an alien invasion with a semi-predictable plot then I'm still all up for it. Really the description of Independence Day meets Black Hawk Down is enough to make me go see this.
Nah they refuse if the military is shown in any sort of negative light
Which basically means they refuse if anyone breaks protocol or has any sort of ethical lapse whatsoever, and generally they don't help you if the united states loses unless you're documenting an actual historical battle where the united states lost.
Nah they refuse if the military is shown in any sort of negative light
Which basically means they refuse if anyone breaks protocol or has any sort of ethical lapse whatsoever, and generally they don't help you if the united states loses unless you're documenting an actual historical battle where the united states lost.
How do you explain The Hurt Locker then?
Did The Hurt Locker have support from the US military?
Nah they refuse if the military is shown in any sort of negative light
Which basically means they refuse if anyone breaks protocol or has any sort of ethical lapse whatsoever, and generally they don't help you if the united states loses unless you're documenting an actual historical battle where the united states lost.
How do you explain The Hurt Locker then?
Did The Hurt Locker have support from the US military?
This is a question I don't know the answer to.
Looks like they yanked it away.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said the film is “authentic” and “very compelling”, He has recommended it to his staff. But the government says it pulled its “Hurt Locker” production assistance at the last minute in 2007, saying that the film’s makers were shooting scenes that weren’t in the screenplay submitted to the Defense Department, including a sequence that the government believed portrayed troops unflatteringly. The film’s producers dispute elements of the account.
Nah they refuse if the military is shown in any sort of negative light
Which basically means they refuse if anyone breaks protocol or has any sort of ethical lapse whatsoever, and generally they don't help you if the united states loses unless you're documenting an actual historical battle where the united states lost.
How do you explain The Hurt Locker then?
Did The Hurt Locker have support from the US military?
This is a question I don't know the answer to.
Looks like they yanked it away.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said the film is “authentic” and “very compelling”, He has recommended it to his staff. But the government says it pulled its “Hurt Locker” production assistance at the last minute in 2007, saying that the film’s makers were shooting scenes that weren’t in the screenplay submitted to the Defense Department, including a sequence that the government believed portrayed troops unflatteringly. The film’s producers dispute elements of the account.
There were some really bizarre inaccuracies in that movie. A single humvee being a "patrol" and the fact that a .50 caliber rifle jammed because of blood or whatever the fuck.
We have a story crisis. Now they want to make a movie from the game Battleship! This is pure desperation, because now the business is governed by the sequel, or what we call it: the franchise. This means turning something already successful into a sequel, because everyone in Hollywood knows how important it is that the movie, before it comes into the cinemas, is already a brand. If the brand has been around, Harry Potter“for example, or Spider-Man, you are light years ahead. And there lies the problem, because unfortunately these brands are always ridiculous. Battleship! This degrades the cinema.
DrIanMalcolm on
0
Options
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
We have a story crisis. Now they want to make a movie from the game Battleship! This is pure desperation, because now the business is governed by the sequel, or what we call it: the franchise. This means turning something already successful into a sequel, because everyone in Hollywood knows how important it is that the movie, before it comes into the cinemas, is already a brand. If the brand has been around, Harry Potter“for example, or Spider-Man, you are light years ahead. And there lies the problem, because unfortunately these brands are always ridiculous. Battleship! This degrades the cinema.
We have a story crisis. Now they want to make a movie from the game Battleship! This is pure desperation, because now the business is governed by the sequel, or what we call it: the franchise. This means turning something already successful into a sequel, because everyone in Hollywood knows how important it is that the movie, before it comes into the cinemas, is already a brand. If the brand has been around, Harry Potter“for example, or Spider-Man, you are light years ahead. And there lies the problem, because unfortunately these brands are always ridiculous. Battleship! This degrades the cinema.
We have a story crisis. Now they want to make a movie from the game Battleship! This is pure desperation, because now the business is governed by the sequel, or what we call it: the franchise. This means turning something already successful into a sequel, because everyone in Hollywood knows how important it is that the movie, before it comes into the cinemas, is already a brand. If the brand has been around, Harry Potter“for example, or Spider-Man, you are light years ahead. And there lies the problem, because unfortunately these brands are always ridiculous. Battleship! This degrades the cinema.
Remember when he made good movies?
How many bad movies has he made?
Woah hey Spider-Man was a good movie what the fuck James
We have a story crisis. Now they want to make a movie from the game Battleship! This is pure desperation, because now the business is governed by the sequel, or what we call it: the franchise. This means turning something already successful into a sequel, because everyone in Hollywood knows how important it is that the movie, before it comes into the cinemas, is already a brand. If the brand has been around, Harry Potter“for example, or Spider-Man, you are light years ahead. And there lies the problem, because unfortunately these brands are always ridiculous. Battleship! This degrades the cinema.
Remember when he made good movies?
How many bad movies has he made?
Titanic and Avatar off the top of my head, but before he made those he made terminator and aliens.
We have a story crisis. Now they want to make a movie from the game Battleship! This is pure desperation, because now the business is governed by the sequel, or what we call it: the franchise. This means turning something already successful into a sequel, because everyone in Hollywood knows how important it is that the movie, before it comes into the cinemas, is already a brand. If the brand has been around, Harry Potter“for example, or Spider-Man, you are light years ahead. And there lies the problem, because unfortunately these brands are always ridiculous. Battleship! This degrades the cinema.
Remember when he made good movies?
How many bad movies has he made?
Woah hey Spider-Man was a good movie what the fuck James
ON TOP OF THE BRIDGE TOWER. Hold a beat. We hear screams approaching. Spidey appears and sets her on terra firma. She clings to him, looking down and around in wonder. He has put the world at her feet. She can't believe this is happening to her.
In a dizzying down-angle we see how the suspension cables all meet radially at the top of the tower... like the treads of some vast spider web. Peter and MJ seem to sit at the very center of the web, surrounded by the lights of the city. It is a warm spring night. And the moment is pure magic.
She stands with her back against a girder, needing to feel something solid. Spider Man stands before her, a perfectly formed male silhouette with a soothing low voice.
SPIDER MAN
Courtship among the spiders is highly ritualized. It varies from species to species. The male spider may circle the female, or wave his front legs... to signal that he is not prey.
Spider Man moves in a hypnotic arc around her. He raises his hands in a dance-like movement. Lowers them.
SPIDER MAN
The female usually signals her willingness by an uncharacteristic passivity.
MJ takes a deep breath. Her lip trembles. Her knees are weak. Her eyes, though, are steady, gazing at the silhouette before her. She doesn't move or speak. He moves closer.
SPIDER MAN
In certain crab spiders, such as Xysticus, the male will attach strands of silk to the female... tying her limbs...
Spider Man moves his hand gracefully across her, and she sees the sheerest silk webbing glinting in the moonlight. First one wrist. Then the other. Hypnotic movement in the moonlight. Her arms are bound to the wall. Her breathing gets more rapid.
SPIDER MAN
Since the female can break free at any time, the bonds have only symbolic significance.
MARY JANE
The male must be very bold... to take such liberties with the predatory female.
SPIDER MAN
Yes. He is very bold. But he must also trust her.
(he moves very close)
Close your eyes.
He removes his mask and kisses her. Their mouths very slowly and very sensuously devour each other. Peter and MJ are locked together. He is mesmerizing, gentle, powerful. He pushes up her skirt. They make love, high above the world. She doesn't look.
We have a story crisis. Now they want to make a movie from the game Battleship! This is pure desperation, because now the business is governed by the sequel, or what we call it: the franchise. This means turning something already successful into a sequel, because everyone in Hollywood knows how important it is that the movie, before it comes into the cinemas, is already a brand. If the brand has been around, Harry Potter“for example, or Spider-Man, you are light years ahead. And there lies the problem, because unfortunately these brands are always ridiculous. Battleship! This degrades the cinema.
Remember when he made good movies?
In the time I have been alive James Cameron has not made a good movie
We have a story crisis. Now they want to make a movie from the game Battleship! This is pure desperation, because now the business is governed by the sequel, or what we call it: the franchise. This means turning something already successful into a sequel, because everyone in Hollywood knows how important it is that the movie, before it comes into the cinemas, is already a brand. If the brand has been around, Harry Potter“for example, or Spider-Man, you are light years ahead. And there lies the problem, because unfortunately these brands are always ridiculous. Battleship! This degrades the cinema.
Remember when he made good movies?
How many bad movies has he made?
Titanic and Avatar off the top of my head, but before he made those he made terminator and aliens.
Those two movies aren't bad.
Sappy and formulaic but not bad.
Macro9 on
0
Options
GreenStick around.I'm full of bad ideas.Registered Userregular
Posts
Dear satan I wish for this or maybe some of this....oh and I'm a medium or a large.
Although, I would have liked "The Battle of Los Angeles" more than "BATTLE: LOS ANGELES IN BOLD FONT YEAH"
Still not convinced enough to see it sight unseen. Slightly more receptive to seeing it after people see it and confirm it doesn't suck. The theatrical trailer leads me to believe there's way too much buildup for a concept that doesn't warrant much explanation
And, this is just a personal peeve
I am sick and tired of aliens invading us because they want our resources. Couldn't they invade us for a slightly off kilter reason once in a while, like, I dunno
Humans must die because their culture is awful and they wont stop fucking broadcasting their cricket games across the galaxy and our race is highly sensitive to radio transmissions
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
That would be problematic since it refers to an event that happens before the movie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Los_Angeles
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
After seeing a review?
Gotta admit that it doesn't help that I already know the ending because the US Army helped make it.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
Plus I'm pretty sure the US military always contributes in some way when you make a film depicting their troops so...
Which basically means they refuse if anyone breaks protocol or has any sort of ethical lapse whatsoever, and generally they don't help you if the united states loses unless you're documenting an actual historical battle where the united states lost.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
that might actually work, though.
they could say whatever that this was
was a like, scout ship or something I don't know.
Ah fair enough
well even so, if this is a well made action film about an alien invasion with a semi-predictable plot then I'm still all up for it. Really the description of Independence Day meets Black Hawk Down is enough to make me go see this.
Anything over 30% on RottenTomatoes means I'm seeing this in theaters
the visuals look extremely nice
I think I know what I am doing on that day.
http://beta.humugus.com/index.php/auth/register/inv/1966
And then the whole movie has a RATM soundtrack
I could get behind this
How do you explain The Hurt Locker then?
Dear satan I wish for this or maybe some of this....oh and I'm a medium or a large.
This is a question I don't know the answer to.
Looks like they yanked it away.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/03/10/oscar-winner-the-hurt-locker-sparks-debate-among-veterans/
Definitely in my top 10 x-files.
There were some really bizarre inaccuracies in that movie. A single humvee being a "patrol" and the fact that a .50 caliber rifle jammed because of blood or whatever the fuck.
Well technically the mortar mix that forms when you combine blood and good ol desert dust
Steam - Talon Valdez :Blizz - Talonious#1860 : Xbox Live & LoL - Talonious Monk @TaloniousMonk Hail Satan
This reminds me of what ol' James Cameron said this week about the Battleship movie
Fuck
Yes
hey satan...: thinkgeek amazon My post |
Remember when he made good movies?
How many bad movies has he made?
Woah hey Spider-Man was a good movie what the fuck James
hey satan...: thinkgeek amazon My post |
Titanic and Avatar off the top of my head, but before he made those he made terminator and aliens.
James was just pissed he didn't get to make his version
In the time I have been alive James Cameron has not made a good movie
so, no
hey satan...: thinkgeek amazon My post |
Those two movies aren't bad.
Sappy and formulaic but not bad.