Actually, a lot of people think Bucky O' Hare was based on him. I'd believe it. Someone who grew up in the late 70s using an at the time obscure SW Marvel character as the inspiration for an early 1990s cartoon character, makes sense.
well obviously. It was a joke.
Hey they got Bucky O' Hare on the team!
Star Trek fans will be interested in this one:
The Captains
William Shatners hosts and directs this documentary which chronicles the lives and experiences of all the actors who played the role of the central captain in each Star Trek series: himself, Patrick Stewart, Avery Brooks, Kate Mulgrew, Scott Dracula Bakula and Chris Pine. Other actors like Jonathan Frakes and Walter Koenig make brief appearances. It's a pretty entertaining and candid documentary--they really open up about some of the more unfortunate consequences of the roles, which you don't often hear about (wrecked marriages, typecasting, etc.). And Avery Brooks in real life is waaay more eccentric and weird than I expected. Patrick Stewart is the best part of the movie. Overall a really solid and interesting movie for Trek fans.
Best part? It's on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Npyj8PON_OA
I'm just throwing this out there. A year ago, me and my roommate played through LOTR: Return of the King for Xbox. It's basically a hack n slash beat 'em up, like Golden Axe if it were made in 2003. Anyway, this game doesn't get enough credit. I started playing again, and if you like games like TMNT: The Arcade Game, this is one of the best titles you can play that is comparable for recent generation systems. There is also a Two Towers game like this, but it isn't as good. But man, I played through this game twice on my own and once with my friend in co-op, and I even watched all the little bonus videos you can unlock. The game itself got positive but not amazing reviews when it came out, but if you like 3D hack-n-slash/beat-em-up style games with a little bit more depth than their 16/32-bit predecessors this is a fantastic title, with some minor flaws, but nonetheless one of the funnest times I have had with the xbox. The reason I am posting this is because I saw it at a used game store for about $20, so if you do see it for a good price then pick it up if you like that type of gameplay.
Oh for the love of god, please play Shadow of the Colossus. I missed it it on PS2 but when my roommate came home one day a year ago with a PS3 HD remake of it...man, I was hooked. I'm kind of embarrassed it went right over my head when it first came out. If you play it all the way through, yeah it's a bit repetitive. But it's probably one of the best PS2 games I have played, and that's saying something. Get the HD remake if you can, it is much more impressive, and comes bundled with Ico, which isn't as good but is still worth owning.
Borderlands has good art design, but the gameplay is above average at most. It's a good game, but I think it's more a case of it's competition making it look good.
Far Cry 3 on the other hand I have been consistently impressed with, and it's a lot of fun. If you play the whole way through you might find some of the missions get repetetive by the end, but for me it's one of the best FPS I have played in a couple years. Good presentation, good graphics, good gameplay, good co-op, it's just an all-around solid game.
I saw the trailers for that years ago and have always wanted to see it. You're telling me it's not very good??
If a movie with a title like Hobo With A Shotgun can deliver on it's promises I expect this to.
Oh, of course, today mod chips aren't much of a factor, because as you said they are more trouble than it is worth. However, you don't think that if a console company designed a lock-out chip to keep used games from playing that it wouldn't re-mobilize the entire pirate industry? If such an extreme action were taken you would see a proportionally extreme reaction. In this day and age it might not even be a mod chip, it could be a firmware hack or something similar. There are only a few hundred (dozen?) engineers working at Microsoft and Sony, but there are thousands of equally qualified programers who would be willing to best them. Much the same as you don't have to pay for any PC software if you don't want to, hackers will find a way if the insentive is high enough, especially since the architecture of the next gen systems is more like PCs than ever.
I was really looking forward to it, then I saw some gameplay and was unimpressed, but I wanted to see what reviewers had to say. Every review I've seen has said that it is sub-par at best and awful at worst. Some people are even saying that it seems incomplete, like they rushed it out. Maybe, but even the graphics and engine don't look all that great to me. Too bad. I hope they make a follow up that gets everything right.
I'm in the middle of downloading Age of Conan Unchained (for like three days now, damn thing is 20 GB), has anyone played this? I'm a huge Conan fan and the reviews are decent and it's free to play on Steam right now.
I guess. PC games did things like user keys because of piracy, NOT because they wanted to extract additional money from the people keeping them in business--anything on your computer can be cracked and ripped, so PC files in particular are vulnerable to counterfit WAY more than any other medium. You can pirate old lady Doris' frog figure from Sears using molds, but it's more effort than it is worth, whereas PC files (via CDROM, etc.) can easily be transferred and distributed via the internet even if the user is an idiot like me (PC keys didn't really exist before the internet). Game companies locking out used games are just artificially manipulating the free market in order to hold their monopoly on the most lucrative entertainment medium to ever exist. But I will say this: even if they were to try to implement such a feature, it would fail. They can have the possibility of such "lock out" features because of the technology inherantly tied to games, but that same inherant technology is what allows people to hack the code and de-activate it. PC software has security keys, but how many people have paid for, oh I don't know, Photoshop? Unless you run a business, I am guessing you have probbaly just stolen the software. I certainly have never known anyone who paid for an Adobe product that wasn't either using it in a professional context or using it in a business context. All that will happen if Sony or MS implement such a feature is people hacking the code, just like when they pathetically tried to implement a security feature for BD only to find people cracking it almost overnight.
Actually you are right. It was Universal Studios, right down the road from Disney World. Disney World is actually pretty boring, MGM and Universal had all the cool rides.
Tobar said:
Harry and the Hendersons (1987)
One of my all time favorite films from my childhood.
Me too. Aside from seeing a few minutes on television I don't think I have watched it since the 1980s. I went to Disney World in 1996 and there was a guy dressed as Harry, and the costume and his mannerisms were so authentic you'd think Kevin Peter Hall was in the suit (and also still alive--he played Predator as well but then died of AIDS a few years later).
xhonzi said:
zombie84 said:
There is nothing wrong about not paying companies when you buy used shit. That's like giving Ikea a dollar everytime you turn on the lamp you bought at Fred's garage sale 6 years ago. Or giving Honda a dollar every time you bought that used Civic off your friend in 2004. Does any of that make sense? Of course not. If I go to Goodwill and get a Hungry Hungry Hippos board game I don't owe Parker Brothers anything.
It's an odd obsession that VG publishers have developed. I mostly agree with you. But there are a few major differences:
A well kept game disc is sold as 'used' but is virtually indistinguishable from a new product, unlike cars, homes, or food. A closer comparison would be to books, movies, music, and other media, etc... Which, of course, have endured the 2nd hand market for decades.
Yes, but that applies to anything. A lamp that just sits on a table in the basement and has only been used a few times would be indistinguishable from a new one. Anything well maintained will perform close to new. Game discs have a finite lifespan because of disc rot as well, something that more or less doesn't apply to many items. A couch that is well kept should look like new, and the used price ($0-200) is only a fraction of the original price ($200-800). This isn't an argument in favour of charging for old games. That principle could apply to anything and everything. Some things wear out by nature of using them--including the old systems with moving parts that you will be playing the games on. The game itself is just one component, it would be like Honda allowing you to have a used car but then charging you for the engine. But again, if you have something like a ceramic figure, unless you drop it or scratch it, it should look like new even if it's 40 years old, but you shouldn't have to give Sears a dollar when you bought that cheesy frog figurine from old lady Doris' yard sale ten years ago.
But still there are two major differences... cost for games is signficantly higher than those other ones, and the rate at which the medium develops.
Not any more than something like a couch. If I go to Ikea and get a cheap couch, it's still about four hundred dollars. A new game can sell for about $40. A used movie costs less to buy and more to make. So do a lot of music albums. Heck, the actual cost of manufacturing something like Hungry Hungry Hippos is probably the same as some video games. Every product also has R&D, just like games as well, someone had to design that couch, some copywriter had to come up with the text on the tag, etc. Again: a non-argument. There's nothing really special about video games or the video game industry compared to many other products.
The service has more to offer, I'll admit--it better, since I am paying them money--but for a free service I'll still always go with PSN. Yes, it's not perfect, but for no money it's a terrific bang for your buck. I suppose if I made a decent amount of money it wouldn't matter. It's the same reason I will pay for Netflix but never, ever even entertain the idea of paying for cable. In the end it is like a $5 a month difference, so who really cares. But to me, like many gamers, that $5 a month is the difference between justifying and not justifying a service. Although split between my roomates, Netflix is a pretty good deal.
Stuff from the Atari, Coleco, NES, GB, Genesis, SNES, PS1, PS2, XBOX, DC systems for starters. Heck, the best Resident Evil game ever made is a Gamecube exclusive. Ignoring retro games is like not watching any movies that were made more than 5 years ago, or not reading any books written after 2006...it just doesn't make any sense. There are literally hundreds of good games--and thousands of mediocre ones--in the history of gaming, just like most people's favourite movies on these sites were released in 1977 and 1980 respectively. Personally, my favourite game console is the Sega Dreamcast. There are 274 American releases and the proportional percentage of good games to bad is so high it would make Nintendo cry tears of blood.
Oh, the premise is downright comic. But you know the premise going in, even though face transplants are (now) a real thing, there is no way you can justify fool-proof face switching to the point where the people's family members can't tell. But the characters and dialogue and everything are okay, sometimes it got a little weird like when John Travolta is hitting on his supposed daughter, but if you accept the fact that it's part comic books it's not a deal breaker. All John Woo films are like that, right down to The Killer and Hard Boiled, which aren't nearly as absurd as that but are clearly and intentionally unrealistic to the nth degree. Maybe sometimes Face/Off seems like it takes itself a bit seriously, but in my memory when you step back and take it all in, does it really ever? His Hong Kong films have more of a poetic quality, which I took seriously as a 13 year old having his world turned upside down watching The Killer when few people knew John Woo or Chow Yun Fat, but as an adult that poetry is more like comic book poetry, which is sort of how I remember Face/Off being like. It wasn't the story, it was the presentation. But who knows, I haven't seen it since around 1998 or something like that.
There is nothing wrong about not paying companies when you buy used shit. That's like giving Ikea a dollar everytime you turn on the lamp you bought at Fred's garage sale 6 years ago. Or giving Honda a dollar every time you bought that used Civic off your friend in 2004. Does any of that make sense? Of course not. If I go to Goodwill and get a Hungry Hungry Hippos board game I don't owe Parker Brothers anything. I think if Sony or MS actually tried to implement such a feature it would be halted by the supreme court.
Video game companies are rolling in money--more than Hollywood--and yet they pay their employees shitty wages and then price-gouge the people actually buying their product. It's the sole reason I never once recommended people to buy an Xbox 360 when you could be playing the same--and more often than not better--games online with the PS3 for free. The reason they get away with it is that video games are addictive and their audience is easily tricked into paying whatever and because two or three companies effectively control the entire industry so they can do whatever they want and no one has any choice. Personally, I don't have any problem with not buying their stuff, I'll have at least one friend eager enough to pony up for it (some of my friends work in game design), and the games I enjoy the most aren't even being made any more anyway.
captainsolo said:
zombie84 said:
A Better Tomorrow I and II
After having re-watched The Killer for the first time in about 5 years I decided to give these a spin. I owned part II on VHS back in the day so I have more nostalgia for it, and it's also much more entertaining because it's the first real "John Woo Film" and has some pretty great action. The first film I have only seen once or twice and it's really something: it's not much of an action film. It's more of a crime drama, with some pretty good acting and directing, with operatic flourishes of violence that give it a slightly comic-book edge. That's on full display in the much hackier--though in some ways more entertaining, in that over-the-top 80s way--sequel, but the original film is a pretty important landmark in Hong Kong action cinema and it's easy to see why. Much like it's American counterpart, Terminator, it's an action film that doesn't quite think of itself as an action film but an honest drama with lots of shooting and chases.
Very well said and accurately sums up these two films. I can't help but love them both. And the fried rice which is like my family. ;)
It's funny, because the VHS I had of part II was (obviously) dubbed, when I got the DVD I wanted to check out the original language but I think I realized that it was over-dubbed as well, so the acting wasn't all that better. Maybe for nostalgia of all else I ended up watching the english dub as usual, but then when it got to the scene where the guy throws the fried rice I wondered how the NYC scenes were in the actual original cantonese track. The dude was unintentionally (I think?) hilarious in the english dub, but in the cantonese original it was so absurdly over the top and cartoonish I literally spit my drink out when I heard it. He sounds like Bebop from Ninja Turtles! It's like they got some voice actor from english anime dubs, which is maybe what they did.
zombie84 said:
I should also say that I really, really miss the days when John Woo was taken seriously as a filmmaker. Even on Face/Off there was still a reverance for him.
I hated hated hated Face/Off before I knew who Woo was. I loathed MI:2 and wondered, who exactly is this guy who can make all this fantastic stylization in terrible scripts? Then came everything prior, and I realized...oh dear god can someone please get poor Mr. Woo back to Hong Kong immediately??
To be fair I haven't seen the film since the one time I saw it when I was 14 or so when it was new, but I remember being impressed by it, and so were reviewers--my grade 8 teacher even mentioned what a good film it was. Cage and Travolta actually commanded respect back then, and remember this was before the Matrix, so seeing wire use and slow motion action scenes was a lot more impressive and impactful, even if the script was a bit absurd. I think that scene where the kid is listening to Somewhere Over the Rainbow as the highrise gets torn apart in a massive gunfight is as inspired as anything Woo has done. Now, Broken Arrow--there is a turkey if I ever saw one. I don't know how the guy got Face/Off based on that, at least Face/Off had a few moments, even if it hasn't aged well.
I'm still a bit confused on why some people say McFarlane was "edgy" or "crude" with his jokes. Why because he made a Rihana joke? Wow, Jay Leno did that everyday in his monologue for a week. I didn't think he was funny, but I certainly didn't think he was tasteless or anything. In fact, with his genuinely impressive singing and dancing and clean looks in a tux, I thought he was one of the classier presenters the Oscars have seen in a while, maybe that's why he came off a bit on the dull side.
I liked William Shatner's Kirk cameo. Watched the first hour then tuned in and out. Seemed a bit more old-fashioned and low-key than a lot of other years. I wasn't that surprised with many of the wins except that Life of Pi won so many, especially best director--Ang Lee looked genuinely surprised. Zero Dark Thirty didn't win anything, and Lincoln, even if it got the big actor win, didn't grab anything else and even best picture winner Argo walked away with just that. It was a pretty wide range of winners, with Life of Pi unexpectedly coming out on top.
I should also say that I really, really miss the days when John Woo was taken seriously as a filmmaker. Even on Face/Off there was still a reverance for him.
A Better Tomorrow I and II
After having re-watched The Killer for the first time in about 5 years I decided to give these a spin. I owned part II on VHS back in the day so I have more nostalgia for it, and it's also much more entertaining because it's the first real "John Woo Film" and has some pretty great action. The first film I have only seen once or twice and it's really something: it's not much of an action film. It's more of a crime drama, with some pretty good acting and directing, with operatic flourishes of violence that give it a slightly comic-book edge. That's on full display in the much hackier--though in some ways more entertaining, in that over-the-top 80s way--sequel, but the original film is a pretty important landmark in Hong Kong action cinema and it's easy to see why. Much like it's American counterpart, Terminator, it's an action film that doesn't quite think of itself as an action film but an honest drama with lots of shooting and chases.
Be warned, the sequel radio dramas aren't nearly as good. But only in the way that ROTJ wasn't as good as ESB.