|
Stupid_Sexy_Flander posted:We would have an iron man suit with a dented chestplate Yeah, pretty much this v  v Tony makes his suits outta some pretty goddamn stern stuff. I don't think a facehugger's acid would be able to get through his helmet, and even if it did, good luck getting through the (much thicker) chest plate.Phanatic posted:Another would be that Obadiah Stane didn't tell Tony: "You've created a fantastic reactor that produces virtually limitless amounts of power in a very small package out of only relatively common materials and which apparently produces little or no pollution, and you refuse to allow anyone else to know how you did it, thus depriving roughly 6.5 billion people, many of them impoverished, of this clean and cheap source of power, and *I'm* supposed to be the bad guy in this movie?" I don't think Tony had a problem with sharing it as a power source. What he had issue with was using it to power weapons, which is what Stane wanted and stole it to power his Iron Monger suit. He knew if he shared it with people, they'd inevitably use it to make newer and better weapons... Which they kinda did, in 2.
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2011 04:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
I bought Little Shop of Horrors at Big Lots yesterday for $3 as I hadn't seen it since high school (over a decade back), and for $3, why the hell not? It was an awesome movie when I was 6, and I felt like watching it again. I must say, it's even more awesome than I remembered. The music; the acting; the skid-row sets, the motherfucking Audrey II puppet and Levi Stubbs' great voice coming from it... it all just works perfectly. However, I must say that the ending kind of blows (and yes, I'm well aware of the original ending; let's not get into that). Why not spoiler a 25 year old movie for those who haven't seen it, huh? Seymour and Audrey finally get married and move into their place that's "somewhere that green," and the final shot closes on a smiling Audrey II bud in their flower garden. This leads the viewer to believe that "Uh oh, it's not over just yet, HA HA!"... but... it is. It totally is. The Audrey II lives exclusively on blood, for without it, it withers and dies (established in the song "Grow For Me"). I'm almost certain that either Seymour or Audrey will find the bud in the flower garden and straight up say "gently caress that poo poo, honey. I'm not going through that poo poo again. Save your blood and let it die." or just straight up take an axe or a weed whacker or something to it until it's compost. That bud is not going to last or survive either way as I doubt either one of them is stupid enough to prick their finger and give it some blood out of pity or let it just chill their in the flower garden for whatever reason. It's over and done with, and that smiling bud acting like it's going to be as big and bad as the first Audrey II is sorely mistaken.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2011 07:04
|
|
|
You Are A Elf posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2011 07:07
|
|
|
sirbeefalot posted:Did you miss the part at the end of the first film where he jumped at the chance to tell the world that he was Iron Man, because deep down he really is that big of a self-centered prick? He was still doing good in the world instead of just being a heartless weapons manufacturer, but he was reaping as much publicity and benefit in the form of praise/acknowledgement/etc. in the process as possible. He was totally in character in the second movie. Yeah, the point of Stark is that he's a contrast of the guy that talks big but is actually a coward. 90% of the time in the Avengers or his own books he's shown as this rear end in a top hat playboy that's only in the hero business for the fame or to show off his new toys. Then you get these rare moments when there's a bomb about to blow up and he flies off carrying it. He has the potential to be a true hero but he really needs to be backed into a wall before he'll do it. The best example is probably in the second animated Avengers movie, in which he says he doesn't do posthumous honors but later jumps in the line of fire because he was in the best position to do so.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2011 07:48
|
|
|
Cowslips Warren posted:Disney's The Little Mermaid. Ariel shows no shock or displeasure at finding fish at the market or for a meal. Ursula at least comments in some 'drat, son, I warned your dumb rear end' way when she sees a fish dead in the market. Also Ariel marries the prince of a seaside village; so either mermaids regularly eat fish but keep some as friends or pets, or Ariel really is the most selfish self-centered bitch in the world. To be fair, we eat some mammals/fish/birds while keeping others as pets, so its not out of the question. The fact some of them can talk in the little mermaid does make it a bit odd, but thats the case with any "talking animals" cartoon that features a carnivore as part of the cast.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2011 18:05
|
|
|
Squalitude posted:Here's one from In Bruges. It's towards the end so I'll spoiler it. Harry and Ken are fighting on the steps in the tower, and Harry shoots Ken in the neck. Harry walks away, to go and take care of the other business. Ken decides to take the gun and crawl to the top of the tower, so he can fall off and warn/get the gun to Ray. He manages to get all the way to the top, drop coins off to warn passers-by, and fall to the ground... a fair time before Harry comes out the front door. There's no way he could get up and do all that before his boss could get to the front, no sir! I just assumed they were near the top of the tower. There's no indication that they're near the bottom, in fact it takes the pansy halfblind skinhead a bit to get up far enough that they can hear him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2011 19:22
|
|
|
Let's talk about Saw III. My memory is fuzzy, but the evil chick who is helping Jigsaw makes a shotgun-collar for the nurse who is meant to keep Jigsaw alive. At some point in the movie, Evil Chick offers the Nurse an axe, and tells her to go ahead and kill her, saying "But how will you disarm the collar, it will kill you blah blah blah". Unfortunately, the collar is literally just shotgun shells with easily accessible hammers visibly cocked. Hammers that could easily have been blocked by a bit of wood or some other random objects in order to prevent the shells from being struck. loving kill a bitch and escape you goddamn bimbo! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2011 19:33
|
|
|
So, I just watched X-men: First Class last night and, while it was an ok movie, I couldn't loving stand the half-assed look of Beast's mouth animations Seriously, with the huge loving budget that they undoubtedly had, they could manage better than that?!
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2011 19:33
|
|
|
XIII posted:So, I just watched X-men: First Class last night and, while it was an ok movie, I couldn't loving stand the half-assed look of Beast's mouth animations Seriously, with the huge loving budget that they undoubtedly had, they could manage better than that?! I haven't seen the movie, but just judging by the trailer I was amazed with how bad the special effects looked, same with Green Lantern.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2011 19:56
|
|
|
wyoming posted:I haven't seen the movie, but just judging by the trailer I was amazed with how bad the special effects looked, same with Green Lantern. I mean, most of it wasn't too bad, but that part really got under my skin. (side note: I'm not sure why I even put that in spoilers)
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 00:39
|
|
|
X-Men: First Class had a shoe-string budget compared to X-Men 1, 2, 3 or Wolverine. There is no excuse for Green Lantern though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 01:35
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Another would be that Obadiah Stane didn't tell Tony: "You've created a fantastic reactor that produces virtually limitless amounts of power in a very small package out of only relatively common materials and which apparently produces little or no pollution, and you refuse to allow anyone else to know how you did it, thus depriving roughly 6.5 billion people, many of them impoverished, of this clean and cheap source of power, and *I'm* supposed to be the bad guy in this movie?" To be "fair" it was because it could be used as a weapon and people treat nuclear power in real life exactly the same way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 01:44
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:There is no excuse for Green Lantern though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 02:24
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:X-Men: First Class had a shoe-string budget compared to X-Men 1, 2, 3 or Wolverine. First Class also had a really short production. Vaughn was complaining throughout the entire thing that they were really crunched for time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 07:49
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:X-Men: First Class had a shoe-string budget compared to X-Men 1, 2, 3 or Wolverine. I think Green Lantern might suffer from too much pointless CGI. I haven't seen the movie, I'm just basing this on the trailer where he changes into his costume and it's CGI. Really, they couldn't make a real costume? It makes him look like a cartoon character with a human head.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 08:47
|
|
|
X-Men: Origins' retarded CGI claws on Wolverine. They seriously looked like something out of Looney Tunes, I was sitting there waiting for him to fire a loving ACME rocket at Deadpool. They looked so much worse than the "real" ones used for the other movies, I don't even understand why they were used; It probably would have been cheaper to give Jackman the old claws they used, right? Surely prop metal doesn't cost as much as CGI editing in what are apparently anime kebab skewers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 12:16
|
|
|
GreenAcidRage posted:X-Men: Origins'...... Deadpool I like Ryan Reynolds, but they loving ruined Deadpool in Origins.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:43
|
|
|
GreenAcidRage posted:X-Men: Origins' retarded CGI claws on Wolverine. They seriously looked like something out of Looney Tunes, I was sitting there waiting for him to fire a loving ACME rocket at Deadpool. They looked so much worse than the "real" ones used for the other movies, I don't even understand why they were used; It probably would have been cheaper to give Jackman the old claws they used, right? Surely prop metal doesn't cost as much as CGI editing in what are apparently anime kebab skewers. I remember a scene where he's looking at his claws in a mirror and when he lightly touches them together sparks shoot out everywhere. I couldn't stop laughing at how ridiculous it looked.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:50
|
|
|
Mu Cow posted:I think Green Lantern might suffer from too much pointless CGI. I haven't seen the movie, I'm just basing this on the trailer where he changes into his costume and it's CGI. Really, they couldn't make a real costume? It makes him look like a cartoon character with a human head. There was a legitimate reason for this. They decided to make the costume CGI to intentionally look like it was a light construct, which is what the costume actually is in the comics. The Green Lantern suit isn't real, it's made entirely of light, so they chose to do it that way to make it more realistic with the comics. Still looked like poo poo, but still...
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:16
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:X-Men: First Class had a shoe-string budget compared to X-Men 1, 2, 3 or Wolverine. X-Men: $75 million X2: $110 million The Last Stand: $210 million Wolverine: $150 million First Class: $160 million But you're right with your last point, there is no excuse for Green Lantern.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:50
|
|
|
Rakanakle posted:I remember a scene where he's looking at his claws in a mirror and when he lightly touches them together sparks shoot out everywhere. I couldn't stop laughing at how ridiculous it looked. This is one of the only scenes from the movie I've seen (this and his indesctructible motorcycle ride). For anyone who hasn't seen it, the cartoon comparisons are no exaggeration. It's like watching Who Framed Roger Rabbit (except not good). And like most CGI inserts, the actor has no real idea how to interact with something that isn't there. There's no sense of weight or reality to his claws.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 21:10
|
|
|
headlight fluid posted:There was a legitimate reason for this. They decided to make the costume CGI to intentionally look like it was a light construct, which is what the costume actually is in the comics. The Green Lantern suit isn't real, it's made entirely of light, so they chose to do it that way to make it more realistic with the comics. Still looked like poo poo, but still... A+ for originality and effort, F- for actual execution, then.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 22:51
|
|
|
Eclipse12 posted:This is one of the only scenes from the movie I've seen (this and his indesctructible motorcycle ride). For anyone who hasn't seen it, the cartoon comparisons are no exaggeration. It's like watching Who Framed Roger Rabbit (except not good). And like most CGI inserts, the actor has no real idea how to interact with something that isn't there. There's no sense of weight or reality to his claws. There is a reason the leaked print is the better film and it is hilarious
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 23:42
|
|
|
headlight fluid posted:There was a legitimate reason for this. They decided to make the costume CGI to intentionally look like it was a light construct, which is what the costume actually is in the comics. The Green Lantern suit isn't real, it's made entirely of light, so they chose to do it that way to make it more realistic with the comics. Still looked like poo poo, but still... Really you can't complain too much about "bad CGI" in Green Lantern, because GL powers according to canon are supposed to look like bad CGI. I mean, we're talking about a guy who's signature attack is making giant green fists and jets.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 01:30
|
|
|
Heres Hank posted:Really you can't complain too much about "bad CGI" in Green Lantern, because GL powers according to canon are supposed to look like bad CGI. I mean, we're talking about a guy who's signature attack is making giant green fists and jets. Which reminds me! I've yet to see the movie (we have it on DVD, I'll get around to it eventually) but I remember the trailers. He had a drat construct minigun...  Am I missing something by not having seen the movie yet, or isn't this supposed to be impossible? The Rings aren't supposed to be able to create weapons with separate projectiles, unless I'm incredibly far behind on my GL lore. Also, the construct FLAMETHROWER from the same trailers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 01:57
|
|
|
Malachite_Dragon posted:Which reminds me! I've yet to see the movie (we have it on DVD, I'll get around to it eventually) but I remember the trailers. He had a drat construct minigun...
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 03:17
|
|
|
SiKboy posted:To be fair, we eat some mammals/fish/birds while keeping others as pets, so its not out of the question. The fact some of them can talk in the little mermaid does make it a bit odd, but thats the case with any "talking animals" cartoon that features a carnivore as part of the cast. Actually it's still pretty hosed up because when Ariel first gets caught hanging around humans Triton goes on a rant basically calling them dirty fish eaters. quote:Which reminds me! I've yet to see the movie (we have it on DVD, I'll get around to it eventually) but I remember the trailers. He had a drat construct minigun... Am I missing something by not having seen the movie yet, or isn't this supposed to be impossible? The Rings aren't supposed to be able to create weapons with separate projectiles, unless I'm incredibly far behind on my GL lore. Also, the construct FLAMETHROWER from the same trailers. The Lantern rings can definitely pull it off, but it wouldn't have been a Hal Jordan move. Jon Stewart would have been right at home doing a machine gun and the one of the reasons Kyle Rayner is told by several people that he'll become the best Lantern is because as an artist he tends to magic up poo poo that Jordan or Stewart would never think of. Throwing a knight at the Silver Surfer in a crossover and riding tidal waves at people is a pretty good example of this. Related fun fact: The blast in the first few seconds of this trailer was originally a big Hal Jordan green fist but they changed it because it does look cheesy as hell.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 03:36
|
|
|
That's the issue with a Green Lantern movie. Aside from a muddy, stupid plot that for some reason threw in Parallax and Hector Hammond, the whole thing rests on the constructs looking cool and not goofy. The best way to do this would be full animation, but at the least you need some really good artists with really clear ideas on how to make the effects cool, realistic, and fun to watch. The original effects for the movie, those shown in the very first trailer, were so goddamn bad that they overhauled and painted over everything to try to salvage it. So you have really bad effects replaced with really mediocre effects from artists with no clear vision. Green Lantern: First Flight is so much better in every way as a movie. A good plot, focusing on Sinestro as a villain, and pretty good art.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 04:54
|
|
|
L.A Confidential (a great movie that I love) has one moment that irritates me every time. The protagonists approach a black boxer for a tip about some suspects, and he agrees to share the info in return for some help with his brother, currently doing time. Once they get the info (which leads to the suspects capture), the detectives basically tell him to piss off, for no adequately explained reason. Not only is this a bit of dickish behavior with no apparent motive, but also - good luck getting another tip in this neighborhood.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 05:09
|
|
|
It's because they are racist against Black people and never intended to help the guy in the first place. It's LA.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 05:29
|
|
|
How did Captain America's shield end up in Tony Starks basement if Cap was frozen with it in the Valkerie?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 06:40
|
|
|
It was a prototype shield.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 06:41
|
|
|
More like a replica. Thing was flimsy as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 06:52
|
|
|
Daddy Stark or Tony probably had a replica around as a reminder that they equipped the first superhero and symbol of American awesomeness in the Marvel Universe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 06:54
|
|
|
Was probably a prototype shield and Tony based the alloys he made his super-suits out of off of it. Vibranium being in the mix would certainly explain why he doesn't end up getting smushed against the inside of his own suit by the concussion when hammered by tank rounds in the first movie I never realized that until just now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 07:29
|
|
|
How in the gently caress did the killer get all those crabs and poo poo in her trunk still alive in the middle of the day with only a few minutes and with no body in the town noticing jack poo poo? I mean really!!! I Know what You Did Last Summer
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 07:32
|
|
|
Razorwired posted:Actually it's still pretty hosed up because when Ariel first gets caught hanging around humans Triton goes on a rant basically calling them dirty fish eaters. After watching the trailer you linked ( which I've seen a billion times and is totally awesome) something irritated me. Why the gently caress is the Flash so useless in that trailer? He was moving so incredibly slow. I mean, we see superman travel from the sun to earth in a few seconds. But the Flash is running maybe 60 mph. What gives? He should have been able to completely avoid the fire from Joker, and gotten to Black Atom in a fraction of a second. The Flash is so incredibly powerful and the video turns him into a guy who can run at a moderately fast speed. I wanna see the Flash kill 10 dudes in 1/10th of a second. Edit: http://i.imgur.com/odw58.jpg Pussy Quipped has a new favorite as of 07:55 on Oct 27, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 07:52
|
|
|
You know what gets me about the flash? Air displacement. Every time he goes whooshing off everyone in his path should probably be deafened at least by the shock wave. Unless this has been covered somewhere in the canon in which case carry on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 08:04
|
|
|
The old Flash was technically a time traveller to hand wave it. And the newer Flash(I'm way behind btw) got to be extra durable or something when he traveled through the Flash Zone to achieve super speed. However, new Flash still obeys other laws of physics by calculating e=mc2 when he punches at guy at 7000 mph.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 10:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
Rurea posted:After watching the trailer you linked ( which I've seen a billion times and is totally awesome) something irritated me. Why the gently caress is the Flash so useless in that trailer? He was moving so incredibly slow. I mean, we see superman travel from the sun to earth in a few seconds. But the Flash is running maybe 60 mph. What gives? He should have been able to completely avoid the fire from Joker, and gotten to Black Atom in a fraction of a second. The Flash is so incredibly powerful and the video turns him into a guy who can run at a moderately fast speed. I wanna see the Flash kill 10 dudes in 1/10th of a second. I played this game for a while, and I have two.. somewhat reasonable explanations in comic book terms. First, if you look at Flash, he's armored in a way he normally wouldn't be. His suit is supposed to fit into a ring. He's in a loving recolored Batman battle suit, and he probably can't move as fast. And secondly, he's not the "normal" Flash. This is an alternate Earth. They had to make his speed reasonable for the context of the game. Your character in the game is supposed to have their DNA mixed with that of existing superheroes- Flash included. If you could traverse the map in the blink of an eye, it wouldn't be fair to anyone who didn't choose Super Speed as their "travel power" (the alternatives being Flight and kinda Batman-like Acrobatics). Edit: Oh, and if you look closely, the first thing you see is Green Arrow dead on a pile of rubble. Ollie Queen would never go out like a bitch like that. 
TShields has a new favorite as of 13:01 on Oct 27, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2011 12:54
|
|
