DominicCobb

Handman said:

DominicCobb said:

Handman said:

Handman said:

These are consistently my all-time favorites:

Amadeus (1984)
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (1966)
Wrath of Khan (1982)
Star Wars (1977)
The Graduate (1967)

Can also add:

The Great Silence (1968)
The Odd Couple (1968)
Days of Wine and Roses (1962)

I like the 60s.

70s are better, but yes.

😦 Not for melodramas and comedies. No other decade can claim It’s A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World.

Well you clearly like that movie more than I do.

And I personally think the best comedy of all time came out in the 70s anyway.

Dek Rollins said:

Jimmy’s face is great. But the use of color and the flowers and whatnot is not pleasing to the eye. Those bright colors don’t even feel representative of the film at all.

Have you seen the film by any chance?

Handman said:

Handman said:

These are consistently my all-time favorites:

Amadeus (1984)
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (1966)
Wrath of Khan (1982)
Star Wars (1977)
The Graduate (1967)

Can also add:

The Great Silence (1968)
The Odd Couple (1968)
Days of Wine and Roses (1962)

I like the 60s.

70s are better, but yes.

Dek Rollins said:

It’s ugly. That’s what’s wrong with it.

Not even a little bit true.

moviefreakedmind said:

Why? I’ve yet to hear a single concrete reason as to why it’s better to substitute something else when we all know what we’re talking about. I––surprisingly, given my thoughts on humanity––tend to give people more credit than to expect them to be shattered by hearing a word even in an appropriate context, but okay with hearing something that refers to that word. Perhaps I shouldn’t though, maybe even that is an unreasonable expectation.

Literally the whole point is that it is a word that shouldn’t be said. This isn’t about people are saying “what up my ‘n-word,’” in that case I would agree. It’s not being used as the word itself, it’s being used when talking about it. There’s a distinction.

Mrebo said:

DominicCobb said:

The only person explaining the context of the use here is the person who used it (and is potentially trying to save face). We don’t necessarily have the full picture.

Agree we don’t have the full picture. But the memo we have is from the CEO who fired him, not the person who used the word. And contrary to flametitan’s reading, the use is described as “descriptive” during a meeting on “sensitive” words, for which he was told inappropriate after the fact. Then he used the word again with colleagues when discussing his original use.

It’s obvious to me he wasn’t calling anyone that word.

Obvious he was calling anyone that to their face. Which isn’t the only problematic way to use it. Beyond that we don’t know. Seems weird to pass judgment one way or the other. Entirely possible there were other factors at play too.

flametitan said:

There’s a major problem with this article, though I don’t blame it for not having information it might not have access to: We only have the memo about him using the word; we don’t have a transcript of the meeting to provide context.

It’s impossible for us, on the outside looking in, to make a judgement call when we lack the full story. Maybe he said it in an appropriate context and this is overreaction. Maybe he used it inappropriately during said meeting. What little we have of it seems to imply (to me, at least) that Mr. Friedland used it in reference to his black employees, or directed at them, but like I said just a moment ago, it’s hard to say. We have too little context.

EDIT: Beat me to it, Mr. Cobb.

It’s fine, you said it better.

The only person explaining the context of the use here is the person who used it (and is potentially trying to save face). We don’t necessarily have the full picture.

You guys are lucky. I haven’t seen numbers like that in months.

paja said:

Wrong thread.

LexX said:

Speaking of Vertigo…

Wrong thread.

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Tobar said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Did you have to buy tickets in advance? Or were they pretty available?

I showed up about an hour early and grabbed my ticket at the box office.

Lol I guess I assume enough other people in a major American city give a rats ass about one of the greatest movies of all time being presented in its original large-format celluloid format to sell out 21 showings over the course of a week.

If you live in the Hollywood area, this might be a legitimate concern. Otherwise, you’re probably good.

SilverWook said:

https://movieweb.com/solo-star-wars-story-december-release-disney-lucasfilm/

Most of that seems plausible but this bit in particular (quoted form the original Star Wars News Net article) seems somewhat questionable:

Disney is done experimenting with new or unusual filmmakers and will go back to proven veteran talent who they know can handle a big budget Star Wars production in an effort to prevent future production chaos, drama, and firings.

I’m not sure if that totally makes sense. First of all, Disney is has been working with tons of “new or unusual filmmakers” at Marvel. Second, by all accounts the smoothest (and also possibly cheapest) production LFL has had since its new management has been TLJ, and Rian Johnson is easily the most unusual filmmaker they’ve hired, and arguably the least tested of any at the initial point of hiring. Whereas even with someone like JJ Abrams, who’s one of the top veteran talents out there, TFA featured a fair share of production chaos and drama (though I guess crucially not firings).

Anyway, point being, I don’t know how reliable that tidbit is. And if it is true, might not be the soundest decision.

Well I kinda don’t feel like keeping up with the “Culture” section honestly, most of those threads are exhausting, so maybe its working already.

To be clear: I think the extra split is a horrible idea.

LukeWarmTaunTaun said:

I’m not taking these questions to be a tool. These are simply things that I’ve always wondered about and thought this might be a place to get answers without getting flamed

1. Lifesigns or not why would the Empire choose not to shoot the Escape pod?

Lot of possible answers, but the semi-canon book “From a Certain Point of View” posits that anytime those officers fire at something they have to fill out paperwork, so they decided it wasn’t worth it. Oddly fits.

2. When the droids are being sold and bought the red R2 is right next to artoo-detoo. Then he goes off and blows a gasket. Then it cuts back to artoo-detoo and unless I’m tripping they use the exact same screenshot as has a minute before that shows the red R2 next to him again???

I believe that’s a continuity error caused through editing.

3. At the very start of the movie C-3PO verbally expresses that he knows the princess but when he’s in Luke’s garage he seems to either be playing dumb or lying?

There’s a version where he mentions the captain and not the princess at the beginning. It’s possible he was lying/playing dumb or maybe has never seen Leia before.

4. How does Obi-Wan not remember R2?

He doesn’t say he doesn’t remember. Also, the prequels were not in mind when they made the original.

5. Why would the Empire bother framing the tusken Raiders but not bother covering their tracks at the farm?

Lazy/didn’t know that sand people ride single file.

6. Why aren’t all the other Troopers WTFing when Obi One Mind Tricks the first Trooper?

I assume he’s affecting them too to an extent.

7. Lucas felt the need to replace the Wolfman in the cantina scene but not Satan? Don’t get me wrong I like them both I just thought it odd

The SE is dumb.

8. When Tarkin is told that leia lied about the rebel base Vader responds verbally… and then there’s a weird delayed hand gesture from Vader…?

Error caused through editing.

9. When the Falcon is first approaching the Death Star how is that TIE fighter not in firing range? It looks just as in range as the rest of the Tie fighters do in the movies

Who knows.

10. When han calls the two Troopers standing outside the falcon to come in and “help him” you hear laser blasts but there’s no markings on the stolen armor nor is there mention of what they did with the bodies??

I’ve always assumed it was the stormtroopers firing and missing. Could be wrong. Who knows about the bodies.

11. In the trash compactor Luke says that he already tried shooting the door but han jumped in mere seconds after Luke…??

There was enough time. Also possibly not shown in real time.

12. Lucas wanted to “remaster” his masterpiece but he felt it was okay to leave the Stormtrooper hitting his head on the door? Again don’t get me wrong I like it that it’s there

It’s a funny moment. Not necessarily an error, even if it was an accident.

13. Leia knows that they’re being tracked but still takes them straight to Yavin 4?

Presumably she thinks their best chance is to mount an attack ASAP no matter what.

New report:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/lucasfilm-licking-wounds-but-not-halting-star-wars-development-1122655?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=THR Breaking News_now_2018-06-22 12:24:28_acouch&utm_term=hollywoodreporter_breakingnews

Says that development on the spin-offs hasn’t been halted, but rather simply they are being reconsidered and possibly reconfigured. Which, again, makes sense. Sounds like it might be possible that the Fett movie will either being a much smaller production than previously thought, or might expand its scope beyond just the Fett character. Who knows about Kenobi.

The ironic thing of course is that none of these movie have ever been officially announced in the first place. So they were probably waiting on Solo’s performance to dictate the next steps anyway.

Might be worth putting out a casting call looking for amateur actors in the area, rather than just fans.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Tobar said:

I’m a huge fan of Guillermo so I wanted to love The Shape of Water but I just couldn’t. Far too perverse.

Don’t get too excited.

Tobar said:

I’m a huge fan of Guillermo so I wanted to love The Shape of Water but I just couldn’t. Far too perverse.

I actually think it’s his best movie, but then again I’ve never been much more than a vague fan of his at best.

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

It seemed to basically a similar story as Splash, but reworked as a dark film with the sexes reversed, and the Creature From the Black Lagoon replacing the mermaid. There’s nothing very thought-provoking about it, which is what I meant by “light”.

I tend to think of light as a descriptor of tone.

Might I suggest “The New Subforum Thread” where mods who want to make a new subform need to check in first to make sure it is actually necessary?

adywan said:

I just love Rians response…

I too would love to see the “result.”

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

I saw it on a cross-Atlantic flight. It wasn’t the artsy film I was expecting, but a campy “fun” flick set about 50 years ago. The similarity to “Creature from the Black Lagoon” is so obvious that it looks intentional. The best aspects of the film are the sets and the overall “look”, which are awesome, and the “villain” who pretty much steals every scene. I’m surprised that it won best film, because it’s not great. But it refreshing to see that it is possible for a light campy flick to win.

I don’t think I’d consider it “light” or “fun.” Or even “campy.”

“The Land After Time: We’re Back! A Dinotopia Movie”

“Fallen Kingdom” is fine and all, but I definitely feel like it was a missed opportunity to not call it “The Lost Park: Jurassic World.”