Vanilla 1.1.8 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
OMG I’ve been searching for that for ages! Where did you find it?
Found it at Disc Replay, a place which does used dvds. The copy was re-released by Dragon Dynasty.
It really isn’t, though. Draper is definitely a terrible trainwreck of a person, but I don’t see how he’s bland at all. I think he’s fucking fascinating.
Don Draper is a boring trainwreck of a person. Every other character on that show is more interesting than him.
I saw the new Star Trek movie.
My review, in short: fuck J. J. Abrams. Don’t see it.
My review, in not-so-short:
As a not-trekkie, I have to ask:
Maybe now that his master plan to direct every sci-fi franchise ever has been fulfilled, he’s decided to be lazy about the writing.
As another non-Trekkie:
Also, why had I never actually watched Anchorman before? That movie is brilliant.
That movie is brilliant.
Loud noises!
That movie is brilliant.
I love Anchorman.
@ Taku:
@ swenson:
I must reiterate – go watch Wrath of Khan. It might not have as many action scenes, but the narrative is deeper and more developed, and the characters feel more developed. Why have you guys not seen Wrath of Khan yet?
The characterisation and worldbuilding is definitely one thing I appreciate about the Trek verse that just isn’t as fully developed in Wars, but I don’t really have the time or patience to sit through movies in general. I’m not a movie-watching person, so it will take seriously good reviews to get me to watch something, especially if it has umpteen television seasons that I might have to sit through in order to understand the characters and situations in the movie.
I’m just not much of a sci-fi person in general, when it comes to that, but fantasy movies are much more expensive to do well.
You don’t really need to know much about TOS to watch Wrath – maybe some general stuff, like who the main characters are, but that doesn’t require watching the show. Khan was only in one episode, anyway, so you might want to watch that, but it’s not required viewing.
It’s more in the way of background information, I hate having to ask things that directors/writers assume is prior knowledge, like “who’s this guy?” and“why are they fighting?” and so on. I mean you mentioned ‘the Federation’ just before, is that explained in the movie, or it is assumed? Is the Federation the side that the Star Trek works for, or is it the enemy? Why are they enemies, and why haven’t they tried diplomacy?
^ That’s what Wikipedia is for!
Well, Taku, if you do not know what the Federation is, I would say that you may indeed need background information for Trek movies, and if you don’t want to go to the effort to get that (which I understand, and I don’t watch certain things for the same reason), then they may not be for you.
As I said, I’m just not a long-term entertainment person. Give me a stand-alone novel, excellent. Make it a trilogy, I’m less excited. If it’s something that I need to research background knowledge for, and you’ve lost me.
On the note of stand-alone movies, has anybody heard of The Odd Life of Timothy Green? It looks… interesting. Uninspired and saccharine, but interesting. I’m reminded very strongly of the work of Paul Jennings, when watching the trailer (specifically the short story series, The Cabbage Patch Fib).
Well, I would consider stuff like who Kirk/Spock/the Federation are as “general information” – it’s stuff you can look up online, no major time commitment required. So, in essence, what SWQ said.
But hey, I can only recommend this stuff. If that sounds like too much work, then hey, whatever.
re: Timothy Green – I’ve heard of it, and I watched the Nostalgia Critic’s review, but I haven’t seen it. But based on what I’ve seen/heard, it looks like one of those movies that tends to fall apart upon later scrutiny. Kinda like The Da Vinci Code.
I love that song.
I just got back from Star Trek, and I enjoyed it. I’ve got basically zero interest in any of the Star Trek TV shows except as something I sometimes watched with my dad ten years ago, though, so I give no fucks what they borrowed/didn’t borrow or changed/didn’t change. It’s a well-structured movie with a lot of energy that probably telegraphs a bit too much and starts to lumber a bit at the end of the third act like every blockbuster ever does nowadays.
I guess that kind of encapsulates the real problem with me complaining – to a non-fan, none of my big complaints matter, because the non-fan won’t see the problem. I felt like the movie was trying to pander to me as a Trek fan, but it just came across as condescending and insincere – Abrams is making these references, but doesn’t understand them. And by complaining, I just end up looking like a butthurt fanboy, rather than someone with legitimate grievances.
I’m not a Trekkie, but I’ve felt that way with other adaptations, so I see where you’re coming from.
I haven’t seen Into Darkness yet, but Star Trek annoyed me, though it didn’t annoy me until a while after I saw it and I actually thought about it. I feel I am a poor Trek fan though, because I haven’t seen most of the old movies (or even all of the TV show episodes).
New Trek feels like it’s trying to get the “cool” people to like it by making it all actiony without that much substance. Plus, the creating new universe where none of the other canon stuff happens thing bugs me.
Here’s the real problem, from a Trekkie perspective: despite being in a new, alternate universe, a lot of the same stuff keeps happening, and the same characters end up in the same places. Kinda makes me wonder what the point of the whole “alternate universe” thing is, beyond an excuse to cast a bunch of 20/early 30-somethings.
And yeah, I get that it’s maybe not necessarily targeted at the fans, but that doesn’t mean it’s okay to just ignore them, either. Heck, all the recent Marvel adaptations have managed to be both reasonably accessible while also satisfying all but the most rabid of fans.
I was trying to agree with you (don’t know if I made that clear). I consider myself a Trek fan, but I haven’t seen Kahn and other things that calling myself that implies. I’m a completist, though, so I intend to watch it all eventually (and in order).
I actually would have preferred the new Trek to be all new characters rather than Kirk and Spock as young hip people, but that’s just me.
Oh, I got that. I’m just saying that there’s no real point for a new universe, since the guys in charge aren’t making any significant alterations to the characters.
Example: in the original series, McCoy and Spock were constantly disagreeing – McCoy was passionate and emotional, while Spock was cool and logical. In Abrams’ first Trek film, there’s a brief bit where McCoy says that he “likes” Spock. Now, and interesting thing to do would be to have them get along; but later on, they argue over Spock kicking Kirk off the ship.
Or, here’s an idea – why does Kirk have to be the captain, especially when Spock has more experience, and was acting as First Officer under Captain Pike? Heck, why does Pike have to step down as captain of the Enterprise? Yes, he’s in a wheelchair, but he’s walking again in the next movie.
I know, I’m nitpicking. But if you’re going to open up these possibilities, why not explore them?
The Great Gatsby was interestingly flawed. Definitely worth seeing at some point, just for seeing, even if you don’t want to pay for the big screen experience. I would like to write an analysis for the site, but we’ll see how much I remember- I saw it on Saturday night.
I guess that kind of encapsulates the real problem with me complaining – to a non-fan, none of my big complaints matter, because the non-fan won’t see the problem. I felt like the movie was trying to pander to me as a Trek fan, but it just came across as condescending and insincere – Abrams is making these references, but doesn’t understand them.
I’m sorry I’ve been so busy and haven’t come on since I’ve seen the movie, because that right there was exactly how I felt in the middle of the movie.
Afterwards, when I was able to divorce my fangirl rage from what the movie actually was, I could appreciate it was structured pretty well, all things considered. Much better than many other silly action/sci fi movies. But much less a Star Trek with shout outs than some weird cheat overall. Almost makes me wish I could have seen it without that knowledge. Especially the dialogue rip off…grrr.
Taku, I wish I could tell you it’s possible to watch Wrath because by the time I sat down and watched it myself I hadn’t done any preperatory research. Except both my parents are fans, and Star Trek was on near constant repeat throughout my childhood, interrupted by Back to the Future. So I have no idea. If I can make my brother watch it, because he’s avoided every reference since, I might have a better indication.
Eh, I don’t really follow Star Trek so I thought the movie was pretty well done. And I liked how they reimagined the Klingons, kind of a nice change of pace from the whole humans-with-putty-their-faces.
Just watched Iron Man 3.
As someone who has not read the comics, I enjoyed it. The ending was almost forcibly sentimental, but the rest of it was pretty good.
I saw Star Trek today…
^^I saw it too, and agree with pretty much all of your points.
Iron Man 3: Finally saw it. Liked it. (much better than 2)
Star Trek: Heard the secret. Swore off paying one single cent to it.
All the Trek-related anger stems from fan outrage.
I guess it depends on the fans – personally, I was offended by a lot of the “shout outs” Abrams included. As I mentioned before, I feel they came across as very insincere and pandering.
I saw Iron Man 3 today myself. I thought it was great. Not even going to bother with Star Trek: Into Whiteness, though, so I’m not able to give comment.
I didn’t see Iron Man 3 so I can’t really compare to Star Trek. I’m not a die-hard fan of either. Star Trek was entertaining but not mind-blowing, but I will say that the score was very nice and the space visuals were gorgeous.
Brave was just kind of bizarre.
So I just got back from the Dragonball Z movie Man of Steel.
Spoiler free review (though is that really a possibility?):
Your enjoyment will probably be proportionate to how attached you are to the Supes mythos. Heck, if you normally don’t like Superman you could end up enjoying this film. Hardcore fans might have to restrain their nerd rage but it’s not a bad elseworlds tale.
There’s a couple of story structures I’d change but… heck, I’m actually wanting to watch it on IMAX 3d just for the spectacle.
My brother saw Man of Steel early, in 3D, for free. If I cared more about Superman, I’d be insanely jealous. As it is, the only reason I’m even remotely interested is for Amy Adams as Lois Lane, because Amy Adams is great.
@rocky
1) I can tell he’s been reigned in by Nolan. There’s some questionable direction choices but the action isn’t too bad on the whole.
2) Oh it definitely isn’t. And I’m counting both Donner supes 1 & 2 put together. At some points it almost goes out of its way to be different.
3) Actually… it kind of is “marvel-ish” though I’m not sure even with their huge stable they have a fully defined style.
@SWQ – I just love Amy Adams (soooo cute) but she is one of my favorite Lois in awhile. Heck, she’s never in trouble because of her own stupidity in this movie as much as because she doesn’t listen to caution the way most humans do. (which is in character for her)
I just love Amy Adams (soooo cute) but she is one of my favorite Lois in awhile. Heck, she’s never in trouble because of her own stupidity in this movie as much as because she doesn’t listen to caution the way most humans do. (which is in character for her)
That’s good…it’s really disappointing when these superhero movies get great actresses to play the girlfriends (ahem, Natalie Portman) and then criminally underuse them/not let them do anything remotely interesting. :P
My relationship with Superman is that I like him in theory when handled correctly—I genuinely like the idea that there’s one superhero who is truly the Boy Scout, who really is in it for completely altruistic reasons and isn’t all morally conflicted and stuff. But I know precious little about his mythos aside from what I’ve picked up from a handful of Superman stories I’ve read, so that being messed with doesn’t bother me much. But, then, I don’t mind when superhero backstories are messed with anyway, so long as the core of the character remains (Nolan’s Batman, for example, mostly gets a pass—except for the whole letting people die thing).
In other words, I’m pretty sure I’m going to like Man of Steel. :)
I give zero fucks about the Superman mythos and I thought it was decent but it didn’t blow me away. It had pretty good bones but all the flying around and smashing shit just got tedious after awhile.
If flying around and smashing things can get tedious, then you probably shouldn’t watch a superman movie.
Sort of like how you don’t go to a Hulk movie if ya don’t like watching anger issues. ;-)
Saw Warm Bodies.
Freaking hilarious. Sweet, but snarky and full of dark humor and fluffy.
If flying around and smashing things can get tedious, then you probably shouldn’t watch a superman movie.
Sort of like how you don’t go to a Hulk movie if ya don’t like watching anger issues. ;-)
This is a pretty shitty analogy. Hulk’s character is centered around anger issues, and dealing with those issues is part of an actual story. If somebody asked you to tell them about Superman’s character, would you start with saying he spends all his time flying around and destroying everything?
I have to agree with Sansa somewhat, though I come from the “do more with less” camp when it comes to action. It has the effect of almost overwhelming you. By contrast, I thought the final battle in The Avengers was overly long, but in a sort of “no one’s really doing anything but punching/shooting the same stuff” sort of way.
This is exactly what I mean. To me, the most effective action bit in the whole movie is when
It’s not nearly as long and flashy as the other set-pieces, but it strongly connects the action on the screen to the emotions Clark is feeling. It’s also one of the only parts(probably the only part) where I felt like the shaky-cam added something to it instead of making stuff muddled and incoherent.
The really frustrating part about this is they actually bothered to do the legwork for putting story into the action scenes, they just didn’t let it drive most of the scenes themselves. It ended up feeling kinda filler-ish at times, and I don’t think it needed to.
No no, there is a reason for the final action sequence. Though I will admit it is not well established or reinforced in the movie (one of my structural complaints).
Just got back from seeing Man of Steel. I mostly enjoyed it, though I have a few problems with it.
Agony Booth has a review I endorse, though I didn’t find Kevin Costner quite as emotionally invoking as say… John Schneider.
House of Flying Daggers
Dunno. I guess I’m more than a little disappointed, but I’m not sure if that’s just because it wasn’t what I was expecting. The cinematography is phenomenal though. It’s one of the best films I’ve ever watched, visually speaking. The colors are vibrant, exciting and fresh, and each scene has a different tone and richness to it that you simply don’t find in other films.
Again, I was expecting something similar to Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon because they’re so often paired together, but House of Flying Daggers places a much higher emphasis on the romance, and it really threw me off when the story took off in a completely different direction than I expected. I felt pretty bored for the first hour, and some of the romance scenes are painfully, paaaaainfully awkward, but overall it’s a good film. I think if I was to re-watch it with a different mindset and a general idea of what the film is going to be like I would appreciate it more, though.
House of Flying Daggers bummed me out so much.
^^Yeah, I went in with high expectations because a friend of mine recommended it (with quite a bit of enthusiasm) and I was rather disappointed. I liked the visuals, but I hated the romantic aspects of it and some of the action scenes could’ve been better done.
I’ve never been a fan of “kung fu fantasy”. I much prefer realism in my fight scenes.
I can tolerate some improbable fight scenes, but not scenes involving characters leaping around in bamboo tops, flying around in the air with legs flailing all over the place, flying over water with a serious expression and flailing legs or something similar.
I saw the Monsters University movie and it was pretty cute, though not fantastic.
Oh, damn
Well, $160 billion is still nothing to be proud of.
Actually, if you pay attention, the Avengers engaged the chitauri to keep them in one section of the city. They set up a perimeter and held it.
Cap to police: I need men in these buildings. There are people inside that can run into the line of fire. You take them through the basement or through the subway, you keep them off the streets. I need a perimeter as far back as 39th.
Cap directing Avengers: Alright, listen up. Until we can close that portal our priority’s containment. Barton, I want you on that roof, eyes on everything. Call out patterns and strays. Stark, you got the perimeter. Anything gets more than three blocks out, you turn it back or you turn it to ash…Thor, you gotta try and bottleneck that portal. Slow ‘em down. You got the lightning. Light the bastards up….You[Black Widow] and me, we stay here on the ground, keep the fighting here. And Hulk? Smash!
...so, Hawkeye letting Iron Man know he had strays doesn’t count. Letting Cap know about the cornered people in that bank doesn’t count. Stark distracting as many jet skis as possible and keeping them off the streets doesn’t count. Thor DID bottleneck the portal, destroying several giant whale things, then went to hammer stuff. It isn’t explicitly said, but it seemed obvious to me that Thor can’t do indefinite lightning. And Thor didn’t KNOW about the nuke. Black Widow was the one to point out that they needed to outsmart the portal, and the chitauri stuff is point and shoot. And Loki is a schemer, not a battle commander. He screwed up. Loki’s aborted Hulk temper tantrum seemed pretty in character.
And as far as the portal, plan 1 was OH SHIT ALIENS EVERYWHERE. I loved that Widow had to remind Cap about it, because I WOULD BE PRETTY FLUSTERED BY AN ALIEN INVASION TOO.
Without interrupting the nerdrage, I just want to offer one minor correction:
That’s not Sun-Tzu, that’s common sense
MC: Sun Tzu IS common sense.
Yes, Rocky, you didn’t like Avengers. Fine. Wonderful.
Yes, the original pic was kinda stupid and over-simplified, but what do you want? It’s from the Internet – 90% of everything on the Internet is stupid.
Right. I keep forgetting my opinions here are invalid and irritating. Humor me
I didn’t say that. I’m responding to how you reacted to the stupid little joke that Willow posted, rather than just let it slide because, again, it’s a stupid little joke. Yes, your opinion is perfectly valid, and you made some very good points. But your tone has been really confrontational, which is way more than a stupid little joke deserves. Yes, Willow is also partly to blame, but you kind of overreacted.
I’m sorry if I came off as flippant, but you dragged this whole thing out way longer than it deserved.
Shame on you for having an opinion and articulating it at length, Rocky.
O.o
Well, this went boom. Partially my fault, I shouldn’t have been so aggressive. To sum up, I enjoyed The Avengers and felt it flowed relatively logically and cohesively, especially for a comic book movie. Obviously you didn’t see it the same way; we’re cool. I still think my original joke post was funny, though. And our movie taste is very different anyway; I didn’t like TDK or TDKR.
Relax guys, it;‘s movies. If I may quote Finding Neverland:
Charles Frohman: You know what happened, James, they changed it.
J.M. Barrie: They changed what?
Charles Frohman: The critics, they made it important… hm, what’s it called? What’s it called?
J.M. Barrie: Play.
Charles Frohman: Play.
Finally got around to seeing The Dark Knight Rises.
Personally, my main problem with TDKR was the screenplay. It tried to do too much- introducing Talia, Bane, Catwoman and Robin in one film when they hadn’t been built up previously? This was particularly egregious in the case of ,
I did love Michael Caine and Cillian Murphy’s cameo. I was also quite impressed with Anne Hathaway- girl does not deserve the hate. Nolan’s Batman films are not so great as far as female characters are concerned, so it was nice to see someone out there kicking ass for the other 50% of us.
And that was a belated review. In short- I consider it a missed opportunity.
I talked about it when I saw the movie in theaters, but I also really liked Anne Hathaway’s performance. Catwoman is one of my favorite characters, and I thought Hathaway did a good job with capturing her style, you know? Comic book Kitty would absolutely do most of the stuff she did in the movie.
And the movie must be given props for coming up with a vaguely better reason for No Man’s Land than the original one, which was just plain stupid.
I agree with all of that, but I still enjoyed the movie and Catwoman and Bane’s roles in it. It’s one of those things where I just accept that it’s not as good as it could have been (but was still enjoyable).
Catwoman>Talia al-Ghul
On a different note, watching ‘Lord of the Rings’ with Spanish subtitles is lots of fun. Everyone is ‘senor’ instead of ‘lord’.