V

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEx9r5enZsk

C3PX said:

I just don't see it.

Word to your mother. 

Steroids don't automatically make you hit home runs and head starts don't automatically mean you're gonna win the race, but its still cheating. 

Vaderisnothayden said:

V said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

V said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

But I was pissed off about Samuel L Jackson being Nick Fury. I think it's racist to change the race of a character, at least if the character is well-established, important and popular.

 

No, its racist to say that every comic book character should only be played by actors of the same race.  Skin color doesn't matter, talent does.  I think Denzel Washington would be an outstanding Two-Face, but people like you would never get past that he's not the same color as the character from the comics. 

Vaderisnothayden said:

And why are they not using the classic character that was important for so long instead of some recent invention?

 

They did. 

 

And he was terrible.  The Ultimate version of Nick Fury is not only black, but is modeled after Jackson.  They couldn't have chosen a better candidate. 

No, its racist to say that every comic book character should only be played by actors of the same race.  Skin color doesn't matter, talent does. 

I'm sorry but that's absolute bullshit. Characters should be kept faithful to what they are. Black characters should not be made white and white characters should not be made black, etc. There's nothing racist about insisting on some faithfulness to the source material.

And so what if an attempt at doing the original Nick Fury went wrong before. That hardly proves it has to go wrong. With a different actor and a different script it could be quite different. 

And if they want to do Marvel they should do proper Marvel, not this "Ultimate" bullshit.

 

 

Being truly faithful would be getting the core of the character right, whether or not the actor is the same race.  It's the inside that counts, not the outside.  And if you want them to be your idea of faithful, that's exactly what they're doing by casting Jackson- black actor for black character.  But you still can't get past the fact that the Ultimate Fury is black.  You want Fury to be white because that's the only way you will accept him. 

Just because the original Fury was white doesn't mean they're chained and bound to making the character white in the movies.  The original Hulk had gray skin, the original Batman killed criminals, and the original Wolverine was a highly-evolved wolf but all those characters changed over time, just like Fury.  Doesn't matter if the Ultimate Fury's been around for a much shorter time, it's a version of the character than Favreau chose to go with.  And rightfully so, because the Ultimate Nick Fury is basically Sam Jackson as a comic book character, and Jackson playing him in the movies is pretty goddamn faithful. 

I don't have any problem with the Ultimate Fury being black. Don't make assumptions about me based on not knowing a thing about me. But I do have a problem with Marvel films being based on this new-fangled Ultimate stuff. It should be quite understandable that I would want Marvel movies to be based on the classic stuff I grew up with and not some new stuff I don't care about.

As it is, I came to this thread not having a clue that there was any such thing as a black SLJ-based Ultimate Fury and when I was told about it I wondered why are they using this new Ultimate stuff instead of the classic stuff?

I'd heard some things about this Ultimate stuff before (though not about their Nick Fury) and I haven't been positively inclined towards it. My attachment is to the original Marvel, not some new-fangled thing that popped up after I quit reading Marvel when Marvel stuff was getting shittier.

Being truly faithful would be getting the core of the character right, whether or not the actor is the same race.  It's the inside that counts, not the outside. 

A person's race is part of who they are. If you want to be faithful to the material you keep major details like race or gender consistent. I don't think it would be right to cast a white man as Storm and by the same token I don't think it would be right to cast a black woman as Spiderman. Not that Tobey Maguire is any use in the role.

And if you want them to be your idea of faithful, that's exactly what they're doing by casting Jackson- black actor for black character. 

Sure. If you want to do the Ultimate Fury instead of the classic one. But I still can't see why they want to do the new Ultimate stuff rather than the classic stuff that made the legend. It's kind of like choosing the SE over the OOT.

Just because the original Fury was white doesn't mean they're chained and bound to making the character white in the movies.  The original Hulk had gray skin, the original Batman killed criminals, and the original Wolverine was a highly-evolved wolf but all those characters changed over time, just like Fury. 

They're bound and chained to keep to something like what's in the comics. And I think they should base the movies on the classic stuff that made the legend rather than new-fangled Ultimate stuff. As far as I can tell, Fury didn't change into Ultimate Fury. Rather, Ultimate Fury is a separate character from a splinter line of Marvel. They had a choice whether to go with the classic stuff that made the legend or go with a new thing. I'd prefer the classic stuff. I don't know this SLJ Fury, but I grew up with the original Nick Fury, so it shouldn't be hard to understand me preferring to see him portrayed on the big screen rather than the character I don't know. And not portrayed on the big screen by Hasselhoff.

Doesn't matter if the Ultimate Fury's been around for a much shorter time,

But it does matter. The original Fury is the one that made the legend. He's the Original.

I wondered why are they using this new Ultimate stuff instead of the classic stuff?

Because they can.  Favreau believes that Jackson can play the comic book version of himself and would rather not take a chance with someone else.  If a character is directly moddled after an actor, then shouldn't that actor play the character?  It would be missing a huge opportunity.

A person's race is part of who they are. If you want to be faithful to the material you keep major details like race or gender consistent. I don't think it would be right to cast a white man as Storm and by the same token I don't think it would be right to cast a black woman as Spiderman. Not that Tobey Maguire is any use in the role.

Gender is a different issue.  If it were Nikky Fury, then your arguement for a male one would be a better one. 

But it does matter. The original Fury is the one that made the legend. He's the Original.

Nick Fury is hardly a legend.  You think the average movie goer knows who the hell Nick Fury is?  If he were this great character, he would have gotten an adaptation by now other than small roles in the Spider-Man cartoon and a DTV movie starring Hasselhoff.  He's a supporting character that's never taken off on his own.  Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, those are comic legends because everyone knows who they are, even if they haven't seen any of the movies or read any of the comics. 

Vaderisnothayden said:

V said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

But I was pissed off about Samuel L Jackson being Nick Fury. I think it's racist to change the race of a character, at least if the character is well-established, important and popular.

 

No, its racist to say that every comic book character should only be played by actors of the same race.  Skin color doesn't matter, talent does.  I think Denzel Washington would be an outstanding Two-Face, but people like you would never get past that he's not the same color as the character from the comics. 

Vaderisnothayden said:

And why are they not using the classic character that was important for so long instead of some recent invention?

 

They did. 

 

And he was terrible.  The Ultimate version of Nick Fury is not only black, but is modeled after Jackson.  They couldn't have chosen a better candidate. 

No, its racist to say that every comic book character should only be played by actors of the same race.  Skin color doesn't matter, talent does. 

I'm sorry but that's absolute bullshit. Characters should be kept faithful to what they are. Black characters should not be made white and white characters should not be made black, etc. There's nothing racist about insisting on some faithfulness to the source material.

And so what if an attempt at doing the original Nick Fury went wrong before. That hardly proves it has to go wrong. With a different actor and a different script it could be quite different. 

And if they want to do Marvel they should do proper Marvel, not this "Ultimate" bullshit.

 

 

Being truly faithful would be getting the core of the character right, whether or not the actor is the same race.  It's the inside that counts, not the outside.  And if you want them to be your idea of faithful, that's exactly what they're doing by casting Jackson- black actor for black character.  But you still can't get past the fact that the Ultimate Fury is black.  You want Fury to be white because that's the only way you will accept him. 

Just because the original Fury was white doesn't mean they're chained and bound to making the character white in the movies.  The original Hulk had gray skin, the original Batman killed criminals, and the original Wolverine was a highly-evolved wolf but all those characters changed over time, just like Fury.  Doesn't matter if the Ultimate Fury's been around for a much shorter time, it's a version of the character than Favreau chose to go with.  And rightfully so, because the Ultimate Nick Fury is basically Sam Jackson as a comic book character, and Jackson playing him in the movies is pretty goddamn faithful. 

Vaderisnothayden said:

But I was pissed off about Samuel L Jackson being Nick Fury. I think it's racist to change the race of a character, at least if the character is well-established, important and popular.

 

No, its racist to say that every comic book character should only be played by actors of the same race.  Skin color doesn't matter, talent does.  I think Denzel Washington would be an outstanding Two-Face, but people like you would never get past that he's not the same color as the character from the comics. 

Vaderisnothayden said:

And why are they not using the classic character that was important for so long instead of some recent invention?

They did. 

And he was terrible.  The Ultimate version of Nick Fury is not only black, but is modeled after Jackson.  They couldn't have chosen a better candidate. 

vote_for_palpatine said:

I presume Fett has to have Darth Vader on speed-dial -

SO WHY THE HELL IS VADER NOT IN JABBA'S PALACE WAITING ON LUKE?!? HOW INCREDIBLY, STUPIDLY, MIND-BLOWINGLY INCONSISTENT TO ESTABLISH DARTH VADER AS SOME SORT OF MASTER OF FORCE-POWERED DEDUCTIVE REASONING ("That's it. The Rebels are there!") WITH A HUGE BONER FOR LUKE'S FORCE POWERS IN ONE MOVIE, THEN IN THE NEXT MOVIE, WHEN THE PLOT CONVENIENTLY GETS ALL OF LUKE'S FRIENDS (LukeBait) TOGETHER ON ONE PLANET, A PLANET VADER KNOWS QUITE A LOT ABOUT BY THE WAY, HE'S NOT SITTING AT THE HEAD OF A DINING ROOM TABLE???

I look at it as Fett just not giving a damn.  I don't think this "bounty hunter" has any real personal feel into the Rebellion/Empire conflict.  So I just like to think once Boba sold Han, or whatever, to Jabba, the fat man offered him a job as a bodyguard, or something.  Fett takes the job, makes his home on Tatooine, and gets a fat, regular check for whatever it is he does.  Probably sponge baths for Jabba, but I hope not. 

And since a whole year has passed, Vader couldn't just be sitting at Tatooine for that whole time.  He's still second in command of the Empire and he's got stuff to do.  He's got errands to run for the Emperor, as he's now been "pussified" into saying, "Oh yes, boss.  I'm useless.  What?  No!  No, I wasn't planning to overthrow you!" 

I'm 99% positive Black Widow is not going to be a villain.  Plus, having multiple villains isn't the problem, it's how they are handled.  Batman Begins had: Ra's Al Ghul (should have been pronounced "Raysh," but whatever), Scarecrow, the mob, and corrupt cops.  The Dark Knight: The Joker, Two-Face, Scarecrow, the mob, and corrupt cops.  Both those movies are fantastic and feature more villains than any other comic book movie. 

Something like Spider-Man 3 is an example when the director and writer couldn't decide on how much screen time each villain should get and you get a huge cluster of shit. 

I watched at least one horror movie a day and it was awesome. 

Force hump! 

When he busted out the MJ moves, I lost it.

Damn.  I was too late.  The only thing that;ll make me feel better is to SCREAM! 

xhonzi said:

Most of all I can remember is: "You kicked wolfman in the nads!" or something like that. (or was it "nards"?)

And an argument as to whether "Frankenstein" refered to the monster or the scientist.

"Wolf Man's got nards!"

Lane Staley

Michale Graves

Bob Dylan

Always thought Kurt Russell would have made a great Han Solo.

 

xhonzi said:And I picked up a copy of Monster Squad a year or two ago.  I'm a little nervous about watching it and realizing that not only is it not great... but that it's actually terrible.

 

The Monster Squad is definitely a sub-par movie, but it has certain things worth watching.  Throughout all the monster movies, we always hear what can kill them, but nobody ever tries another way.  Well, thanks to TMS, we find out what happens when you shove a stick of dynamite down a Wolf Man's pants.  He'll blow the fuck up, but he's going to fully regenerate as if nothing ever happened.  And Gillman never looked more badass. 

Great work done by Stan Winston and co. 

It's also the only film to have ever featured all five classic monsters, even if only Dracula was necessary to the plot.  The movie's cheesy as hell in a lot of parts, but I like it because it reminds me of my childhood where my love of horror began.

I usually try to watch something new, but I  have been re-watching the Universal monster movies from the 30's and 40's.  Great movies if anyone is wondering.  Some of my "must watch" monster classics are:

Dracula

Frankenstein

Bride of Frankenstein

The Wolf Man

Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man

And +1 for the fans of Evil Dead 2.

GET YOUR OWN TAUNTAUN! 

Akwat Kbrana said:

And he's courteous enough to take off his shoes when he comes onboard!

Manners are their own reward, gentlemen!

He had so many pauses, it sounded like a soundboard.  Maybe Rome had to ask someone off microphone on how to pronounce the names. 

SilverWook said:

Birthday tricks for the Trickster!

+1 for the Flash reference. 

Here's hoping he doesn't screw up Willow 2:  Willowier. 

I really loved the line about how their aim became shotty after the helmets were put on.  You never really see the soldiers who are trained to kill actually kill anyone. 

Ziz said:

No, on Fox it would be moved around, delayed and pre-empted because of football games, then Fox would cancel it complaining that it wasn't getting ratings.

Word.  They thought people no longer watched Futurama or King of the Hill.