logo Sign In

Darth Chaltab

User Group
Members
Join date
21-Mar-2004
Last activity
6-Jan-2011
Posts
10,487

Post History

Post
#302414
Topic
Video Games - a general discussion thread
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/302414/action/topic#302414
Time
Originally posted by: C3PX
For any of you DS owner out there,

I have been thinking about buying a new portable system for a while now. I am still using my old Gameboy color, and I was thinking about buying a GB SP since it can play GB Advanced games as well as the old GameBoy and GameBoy Color games, and it has a backlight (I have put up with barely being able to see what I am playing for long enough). Though looking at the price difference between the GB SP and the NDS, I feel tempted to spend a bit extra and get the DS.

Only problem is my old GB and GBC games won't work on it. However, I heard you can emulate old GB and GBC on it. Has any one ever tried this? If this can be done simply enough and without costing a small fortune, then I could just get the rom files for all the GB and GBC games I own and play them this way. So I was wondering if anyone here has done this with their NDS, and if it is very costly or too much of a hassle. If it is going to cost more than fifty bucks to get it setup, I might as well just buy a DS and then get a used GB SP, rather than trying to get the DS to emulate the old games. Though the idea of having ScummVM on a DS with the ability to play Monkey Island in the palm of my hand sounds pretty cool too.


...You can mod the PSP to emulate all sorts of GameBoy games, but I've never heard anything like that regarding the DS. A little Googling seems to indicate the DS can be modified to run homebrew stuff, but you'll have to buy some special equipment for that. No idea on the price.

If you want to emulate old games, the PSP would be a lot easier for that purpose. The DS has a far better line up of native games, though.
Post
#302263
Topic
The Dark Knight (Batman Begins Returns Again)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/302263/action/topic#302263
Time
I was just thinking the other day that one of the reasons I didn't really like Spider-Man 3 much is that the Mary-Jane/Peter arc was essentially the same as it was in the second film with a few changes, IE Harry instead of John Jameson. She still ends up getting kidnapped again... again. Then of course she gets back together with Peter at the end again. I'd like to see a superhero film where the hero and his lady have a rock-solid relationship already and she supports him, helps him out, does some heroic stuff of her own, and doesn't get kidnapped to move the plot along.... Unless the abduction is an intentional attempt to infiltrate the villains' hide out.
Post
#301694
Topic
Beowulf
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/301694/action/topic#301694
Time
Originally posted by: Nanner Split
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Originally posted by: Johnboy3434
So Hollywood butchered a piece of historic literature. So what? You're overreacting.


I'd say this is one of the rare cases where Hollywood made it better.


Maybe it's just because I saw the 2D version, but I thought this movie was absolute balls. Perhaps without the cool visuals, one really notices what little substance this movie actually has.


You expected a movie about Beowulf to have substance?
Post
#301523
Topic
Beowulf
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/301523/action/topic#301523
Time
Originally posted by: C3PX
Jeez Chaltab!

First you liken Ghostbusters to Luigi's Mansion!! And as if that wasn't enough, then you liken a great piece of historical literature, and one of the most frightening tales I have ever read to childrens campfire stories!!


When did I do that?

And what's wrong with the comparison of GhostBuster's to Luigi's Mansion? LM was basically Ghost Busters with a Mario coat of paint.
Post
#301516
Topic
Beowulf
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/301516/action/topic#301516
Time
Originally posted by: C3PX
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
I don't see why people are so up in arms about this. The source material isn't that great or thought provoking to begin with. Beowulf himself is an incredible Gary Stu and constantly veers off into random moralizing while not living by the morals himself.


I am not too familar with the term Gary Stu, but from the provided link it seems like it indicates a cliched character. Which is an odd term to use, since Beowulf predates most of the characters that would make him a cliche. And as far as the story not being that great or thought provoking, I don't think you can really hold such an old work up to modern standards. It would be like critizing Homer's works because they didn't live up to todays standards, or saying that Odysseus is a cliched character. For such a not so great story that is not thought provoking it sure has influenced modern story a good deal. I am in no way "up in arms" about the whole thing, but there is no possible way of denying the historical importance of Beowulf and the impact it has had on stories. I just think it is ashame that such an important work gets such an adaption. I would have liked to have seen something more along the lines of Braveheart and Lord of the Rings, rather than 300. Don't get me wrong, I liked 300 and I thought it was a fantastic adaption of the graphic novel, and its style worked for what it was. But Beowulf? I just felt it deserved better than CG and Angelina as Gendel's mum.


Not that he's cliched, but that he's basically inhumanly good at everything, even morality, just because the narrator said so. I know that's basically how most legends were written way back then, but when I read it it just struck me as a prototype that's been done better by its imitators. I know it was a landmark in British literary history, and I'm not knocking that. At the same time, I don't think we should put it on a pedestal as great literature.

When you get right down to it, Beowulf is better suited to the wartime campfire exaggeration, crazy CGI-fest style in the vein of 300 than it is to the more realistic tone given to Lord of the Rings. Beowulf wasn't a complex story, it's "Hi, I'm Beowulf, King ArseKick of KickArse Mountain, and you're terrorizing my friends. Die."
Post
#301513
Topic
Beowulf
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/301513/action/topic#301513
Time
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Well if it's completely animated then I'll go to see it for that fact. At least when everything's animated you don't have to endure the stark contrast of a real body and a fake one in the same movie (like a CGI Yoda talking to Obiwan).
That's true!

Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
I don't see why people are so up in arms about this. The source material isn't that great or thought provoking to begin with. Beowulf himself is an incredible Gary Stu and constantly veers off into random moralizing while not living by the morals himself.

I liked the way my English teacher told the story when I was in high school. And I love the Star Trek equivalent of Beowulf in one episode of Voyager.


There's nothing wrong with the core of the story, which is why I think a movie would work a lot better than the written form. So far this movie is getting mostly decent reviews. 71% at Rotten 'Maters.