BmB said:
SilverWook said:
Anyone here who believes in any of this moon landing hoax hogwash, might be interested in some prime Florida property I have for sale. ;)
You're still not making an actual point, just ridiculing opposing beliefs. This is not logic.
No. Points not needed. Logic does not work against ass-craziness.
BmB said:
"Cold Logic", "Cold Reality". Hah. Try using actual logic and observation instead of blanket statements and we might get talking. What you probably really meant to say was "I don't believe it".
Personally I don't know. Kubrick obviously was trying to say something. There's a lot of good points in favour and a lot of good points against. What seems to be likely is some sort of hybrid answer, i.e. they faked the first one or two to "win" the space race and then went on to actually go.
No point talking. No good points in favor.
Compromise is good when getting kids to share cookies. There is no halfway point between "ass crazy" and "right."
TV's Frink said:
Or that you were younger than 15?
I guess, but I don't want to turn my wife into a child molester.
While we're on the (not much of a) subject, the new Lego series is like someone drilled a pipeline straight into my fourth grade imagination. My school notebook was filled with doodles that looked EXACTLY like this.
I wish my boy was old enough for Legos.
Just had a student reading a Doctor Who novel in my class. It was Matt Smith, but still, it made my day.
edit:
no knock against Matt Smith. I just don't watch the new show, so I wish it was a Sylvester McCoy story.
If this is legit...
Why I'm stoked.
Bingowings said:
TheBoost said:
Bingowings said:
Frankenstein is just a scientist,
A common misconception. I cite "Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein where Lou Costello clearly refers to Glenn Strange's Monster character as both "Frankie" and "Frankenstein."
Work firewall doesn't let me see you pic, but I'll assume it's about you humbly accepting the rightness of my stance.
Warbler said:
Lon Chaney Jr played the monster part of the time in "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein"?
Legend has it Glenn Strange broke his foot, and Lon Jr. threw on the costume for a couple shots. I've never gone scene by scene to check it out.
Warbler said:
you wouldn't call this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Count_Dracula_%281969_film%29
part of the official cannon of the Hammer series of Dracula films, would you?
Nice point, but that's not a Hammer movie.
But "Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein" has Bela as Dracula, Lon as the one and only Wolf Man, both Glenn Strange the heir apparent AND Lon Chaney Jr as Frankenstein, and of course it's BY UNIVERSAL.
If you ignore the antics of the leads, the movie makes just as much sense as House of Dracula (by which I mean little to none).
Warbler said:
TheBoost said:
I think it would take at least three Wolfmans to beat a Frankenstein.
I don't know about that. One wolfman did pretty well at holding his own against Frankenstein's Monster in "Frankenstein vs. the Wolfman".
TheBoost said:
Bingowings said:
Frankenstein is just a scientist,
A common misconception. I cite "Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein where Lou Costello clearly refers to Glenn Strange's Monster character as both "Frankie" and "Frankenstein."
"Abott and Costell Meet Frankenstein", isn't part of the official cannon.
I content that if the only other time Lugosi played Dracula isn't canon, then canon is what has the problem.
Bingowings said:
Frankenstein is just a scientist,
A common misconception. I cite "Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein where Lou Costello clearly refers to Glenn Strange's Monster character as both "Frankie" and "Frankenstein."
Can't argue with that.
So, I just watched this flick called "CleanFlix" about editing R-rated movies, largely a Utah phenomenon.
If I understand, the LDS leader (Prophet?) made a kind of non-binding request that LDS's shouldn't watch R-rated movies.
My question is, isnt the MPAA kind of an arbitrary/stupid organization? Like, if you're being mindful of what goes in your mind, it's okay to hear "fuck" once per movie, or see buckets of severed heads fly through the air (PG-13 ROTK)? Is something as full of nonsense as film ratings really a good way to judge what should go into your mind? Are "Schindler's List" and "Saw 4" really morally equal?
Do you personally watch R-Rated movies? And whats your take on edited movies?
Watched "CleanFlix" a documentary on the edited-to-be-family-friendly movie business. Interesting.
SPOILERS
So there was this one dude who was a huge douchebag, and the whole movie my wife keeps saying "I don't care about edited movies so much, but I hope that guy goes to jail." and at the end he's arrested on a soliciting underage sex charge.
Had nothing to do with the ideas being documented, but felt satisfying cuz the dude was such a tool.
I think it would take at least three Wolfmans to beat a Frankenstein.
TV's Frink said:
CP3S said:
I've come to really dislike the Wilhelm.
+1000
I'm even tired of hearing it in Star Wars now.
Any movie I hear it in, it instantly pulls me out of the moment. STOP IT SOUND EDITORS!
"Ice Age"
I'm troubled that the saber tooth tiger is vilified. It's established humans killed most of his tribe and... HE'S A PREDATOR. There should be nothing wrong with him wanting to eat a baby.
I give it 4 out of 6 little rats with acorns.
Minor update.
I've been studying a great deal of audio drama lately. I got some BBC stuff, some of the Big Finish audio dramas of Doctor Who, some old school Orson Welles work, and lots of fan drama, good and bad. Also re-listened to the Star Wars radio dramas.
One thing I've noted is that for clarity, less characters in a scene is better. I've cut some unneeded characters, and restructured some scenes.
I've also come to the conclusion that less sound effects is better. Unless I'm trying to make some kind of hypnotic audio landscape, a couple establishing sound effects and maybe a little ambiance goes a long way.
I keep wavering back and forth on whether to keep the narration/narrator, or just try to do without like the Star Wars radio dramas did.
TV's Frink said:
Bingowings said:
TV's Frink used to be and probably still is still the go to guy for Star Wars edit variants.
Used to be yes, but I don't do the cutlists anymore. Too much work, not enough return on investment.
Except our never ending love. :)
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/25/entertainment/la-et-st-jonathan-rhys-meyers-dracula-nbc-20120725
It seems Jonathan Rhys Meyers is going to get his day in the sun/moon as The Count in a new show. Sounds like a pretty loose adaption on NBC, but might be enjoyable.
It also seems there's a film in development about the Voyage of the Demeter. THAT might be a very fresh and scary prospect.
Is something about Harrison Ford just hard to draw? It seems more than any other actor, he just usually doesn't look right.
zombie84 said:
Hayden was a good teen actor who became a bad adult actor.
I disagree. I think he's a fine adult actor. I don't think young John Gielgud could have saved Anakin the way he was written and directed.
I think if Hayden hadn't been Anakin he'd be playing character parts in a lot of movies, with maybe a shot at a leading man here and there, but probably not in an action film.
Warbler said:
considering seeing the film today, even though I said I decided not to.
btw, Does this thing have an intermission? I think it's a long enough movie to justify one.
No. Warning. I took a potty break right after "Master of the House" figuring I wouldn't miss anything too great... turns out that's right when the new song is. grrr
emanswfan said:
Thought I'd put this here for anyone interested. Tom Hooper is considering doing an extended cut of the film but he isn't sure if there are the fans to support it. I feel the movie needs more in certain areas, and signed this petition. Anyone interested should take a couple seconds to sign this.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/les-miserables-2012-extended-edition/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=system&utm_campaign=Send%2Bto%2BFriend
I support this only if he's true to the book and inserts three half hour documentaries into the middle of the story,one on Waterloo, one on the Paris sewers, and one on street slang.
NeverarGreat said:
We just finished watching Season 1, but season 2 won't be available from Netflix until February.
So how closely does the show cleave to the books?
So far, very. A few ommisions, but still a very close adaptation.
I'm reading "Dance of Dragons" right now.
It's like a chore.
Half the chapters are literally staff meetings, so that all the various plots can be explained. Characters I like disappear for hundreds upon hundreds of pages on a stretch, some entirely since the last book. Too many new characters that I just don't care about.
