Dek Rollins

It’s KirBEE.

TV’s Frink said:

Hmmm…you believe different than I do? Ok, you’re going to be tortured forever after you die.

It has nothing to do with what I believe. It isn’t a personal vendetta that Christians have to tell everyone who thinks differently then them that they’re gonna burn in hell.

Oh, and that other guy who led a terrible life, raped, robbed, murdered, kicked puppies and pushed down old ladies, but accepted Jesus as his savior right at the end? He’s a better person than you are.

Again, it isn’t about some kind of contest. They aren’t better than you.

Nah, doesn’t seem like a shitty belief system at all.

It’s pretty shitty to act as if I’m choosing my belief system based on some kind of moral criteria rather than discovering the truth for myself.

Why is it shitty to think someone will go to hell for not believing in Christ? That’s the whole point. If you reject the notion that Christ was God and Man, who died for your sins and resurrected on the third day, you sure aren’t asking for forgiveness. Logic dictates that you won’t be saved if you don’t believe.

partious said:

I watched my 1985 Rocky laserdisc (Japanese) recently and noticed during the final scene that some of the audio was different from the version on blu ray and dvd.

After the final bell in the Rocky\Apollo fight, a piano piece plays briefly before the main music kicks in. IMDB mentions this was removed for the surround sound versions for DVD.

The next thing I cant find any reference to online. On the Laserdisc after the final bell rings, Apollo says "Aint gonna be no rematch" just once and Rocky replies "Dont want one" twice, the second time sounding quite emotional and like he REALLY doesnt want one.

Does anyone know when they changed that to the version that is on every DVD\Blu Ray\youtube upload that I can find of the scene. Apollo saying “Aint gonna be no rematch" twice, followed by a single relatively nonchalant "Dont want one” from Rocky?

The original mono on the BD has the piano playing while they don’t want no rematch, but yeah it has Apollo twice and Rocky once, so I’d be curious to hear that LD. Could you record that bit of dialogue and post it online?

Classics. They get all the stars.

I lost one of my cats to a car some years ago. A very sudden way to lose a dear pet. Friendly feelings coming your way.

LUT added to first post.

ChainsawAsh said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Frink beat me.

I’m pretty sure that exact quote was in here before. From a different post obviously. Though maybe I’m wrong and someone else was doing the beating.

It would not have the selective correction that the new mkv has but sure. I’ll get on that some time today.

TV’s Frink said:

Dek Rollins said:

a bach degree

First time I’ve ever heard it referred to in that way and it should be the last time.

Is there a problem here? I shortened the word because phone. Lazy Dek was lazy.

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Neil is a real scientist. And making fun of Christmas on Twitter doesn’t make him a dick.

Sure it does.

No it doesn’t. If you want to see someone being a dick about Christmas, I’ll do it for you. Christmas is a shithole holiday for hypocrites. That’s being dickish, and I won’t apologize for it.

You have more of an argument with Bill Nye being a celebrity more than a scientist, but you can’t deny that he is extremely intelligent and knows what the fuck he’s talking about.

I’ll deny both things.

Well, then you’re wrong.

He isn’t wrong. Nye has a bach degree in mechanical engineering, and was a comedian. I am sure he has at least a basic understanding of the principles he presented on his show, but that’s like calling me or you a scientist. Bill Nye Saves the World is proof he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

Tyrphanax said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Tobar said:

ChainsawAsh said:

dahmage said:

suspiciouscoffee said:

spoil

I was spared by Thanos. Were you?
didthanoskill.me
I LIVED!

Me too! 😄

Kilroy was here.

I have also survived.

It doesn’t rise from the grave there. He cuts off her head and the body immediately falls on him and humps him. He then leaves it there. Evil Dead II changed it so that he buried the body after decapitating it. That’s why a canonical continuity is hard to find in these movies without cutting bits and pieces from each one into each other.

Thanks! It would be cool if everyone gives final feedback watching the whole thing in motion. I am confident in its quality, but feedback on the image in motion is definitely appreciated. Haven’t had a chance to watch it all the way through myself yet, haha. 😃

LuckyGungan2001 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

I wholeheartedly stick with the “hail to the king” ending.

Man I adore that ending, but I think I prefer the lost in time ending. It feels much more Evil Dead to me.

This, minus the adoration. The theatrical ending is funny and shows the Detroit Mafia’s craftsmanship in a pinch, but I don’t care for it.

If we had gotten the original ending in theaters they may have been more apt to try an Evil Dead IV, in the post apocalyptic future. 😉

And in the Supercut cannon, why is Linda’s head chop not canon? Her head has to be chopped off for her post-recap scenes in EDII.

CatBus said:

Dek Rollins said:

chyron8472 said:

CatBus said:

chyron8472 said:

Possessed said:

*YouTube video I’m not going to click on*

Clip from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.

Indy, teaching class: “Archaeology is the search for fact… not truth. If it’s truth you’re interested in, Dr. Tyree’s philosophy class is right down the hall.”

It’s actually from Raiders.

😉

I don’t know how he could get those confused. The Raiders scene starts with Indy figuring out how to spell neolithic.

Cause I’m a big doodoohead! Stop looking at me!

I’m still looking at you, and I see some kids that didn’t get off at their stop pulling on your levers up front there. Make sure you’re not trying to drive in park.

😛

chyron8472 said:

CatBus said:

chyron8472 said:

Possessed said:

*YouTube video I’m not going to click on*

Clip from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.

Indy, teaching class: “Archaeology is the search for fact… not truth. If it’s truth you’re interested in, Dr. Tyree’s philosophy class is right down the hall.”

It’s actually from Raiders.

😉

I don’t know how he could get those confused. The Raiders scene starts with Indy figuring out how to spell neolithic.

trimboNZ said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

trimboNZ said:
A bit like a certain flash-gordon-inspired space adventure made primarily for twelve year olds perhaps? 😃

I see you’re unaware of my unpopular opinion of ROTJ. . . .

You mean you like it?

No, that’s my unpopular opinion.

I’m pretty sure he’s referring to Star Wars, not Jedi. And I wouldn’t compare a Marvel blockbuster movie of today to Star Wars.

moviefreakedmind said:

I understand not wanting to see a pointless sequel, I just don’t get how the original three Indiana Jones films tell some kind of story that was concluded and never needed to be revisited.

It’s not that all three create some sort of big story. It’s that TLC ended in a way that leads the character to a grand sendoff. It was the emotional culmination of the series. So yeah, he never needed to be revisited again.

It’s like if after Star Trek VI, after all the signatures on the screen and everything, they just made another movie with the original cast, and not only that, but what if it was embarrassingly bad-- Oh… wait.

moviefreakedmind said:

you’re about the Rock

suspiciouscoffee said:

Dek Rollins said:

suspiciouscoffee said:

What about books? Those are artistically designed to be books, but are adapted to film regardless. Are all movie adaptations to be ignored on principle?

This is not the same thing. Adapting basic stories to different mediums is a subject that has nothing to do with this conversation.

How?

Because we weren’t talking about adapting a work to an altered form. You’re trying to purposefully confuse the topic of discussion and I honestly don’t understand why. Maybe start a thread if you actually care about such a topic?

And who says the story adapted is basic? That ignores the nuances and thematic depth a work might have, much like how a movie can ignore such depth or enhance it.

At the most basic level an adaptation adapts the basic story or basic thematic elements. I didn’t mean that the stories being adapted are basic, just that at the minimum (and quite frequently), the basic elements are adapted, without inclusion of the original depth of storytelling, or replacing that depth with different elements that don’t reflect the original work.

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Dek Rollins said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

moviefreakedmind said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

You guys are completely overlooking Dek’s argument. He’s not saying simply that it the Last Crusade wasn’t meant to have a sequel, but that the film was explicitly designed to preclude the plausibility of a sequel. While you can say the former about Star Wars, you cannot say the latter. Very different arguments.

Actually, you can definitely say that about Return of the Jedi.

EDIT: Frink beat me to it.

Did I say you couldn’t? (by Star Wars I mean SW77)

I don’t necessarily agree with Dek that this means there can’t ever be another IJ movie, but at least argue with him on the correct terms.

Do you agree, if I may ask?

No. I agree Skull sucked. But I’d be happy to watch a good Indi movie. I was skeptical of the idea of SW sequels b/c I felt the same way about ROTJ as you do about TLC, but the sequels have been so good I don’t care.

Fair enough. I haven’t liked the direction of the new Star Wars films so I have no reason to reconsider my opinion. 😛

DominicCobb said:

Dek Rollins said:

DominicCobb said:

Dek Rollins said:

DominicCobb said:

“I believe that Buckaroo Banzai Against the World Crime League is a movie that exists because its predecessor was designed to have a sequel.”

This joke has nothing to do with this conversation. I never said that Star Wars Episode XI is a movie that exists just because Lucas wanted a fluctuating number of sequels for Star Wars.

This joke has nothing to do with Episode IX. I’m simply saying whether or not a sequel exists has nothing to do with what the filmmakers had in mind. Not a hard concept to grasp.

I have never stated that Indy 4 doesn’t exist. Your grasping at nothing.

Semantics. You’re acting like it was designed as this perfect trilogy capper. I don’t deny that they thought it’d be the end at the time, but that doesn’t make it the “culmination” of the previous movies or a definitive end for the character.

It was a perfect capper to the series. The inclusion of Indy’s reunion with his father and the character interaction and development that happens because of that, as well as just the whole ending of the film, really is the culmination of the character, and the emotional connection the audience has to him. It’s probably a stretch to say this, as I honestly don’t have any idea if it was intentional (it probably wasn’t), but even Indy giving up the Grail, which is eternal life, speaks to it being the end of the character.

DominicCobb said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

You guys are completely overlooking Dek’s argument. He’s not saying simply that it the Last Crusade wasn’t meant to have a sequel, but that the film was explicitly designed to preclude the plausibility of a sequel. While you can say the former about Star Wars, you cannot say the latter. Very different arguments.

That’s a much worse argument to make. There’s nothing in TLC that precludes a sequel.

Oh, I don’t know, maybe the final shot that lasts through a good portion of the credits that is extremely symbolic of the fact that this was Indy’s last adventure.

That’s a pretty fucking silly notion to have. If Temple of Doom was otherwise exactly the same but ended with Indy riding into the sunset, and then TLC came out five years later (also exactly the same), would you consider TLC extraneous because TOD already gave the character a “clear ending”?

The only reason the sunset shot happened specifically because it was the end of the series. They didn’t do something like that in Temple of Doom because it wasn’t the last film. If that had been done in Temple of Doom, it wouldn’t have had the same effect because that film doesn’t reach the same emotional culmination of the character, but yeah it would probably feel weird if another film came out out after an ending like that. That said, that scenario would be totally different and therefore I can’t say with certainty how it would feel like.

suspiciouscoffee said:

What about books? Those are artistically designed to be books, but are adapted to film regardless. Are all movie adaptations to be ignored on principle?

This is not the same thing. Adapting basic stories to different mediums is a subject that has nothing to do with this conversation.