Oddworld Forums

Oddworld Forums (http://www.oddworldforums.net/index.php)
-   Off-Topic Discussion (http://www.oddworldforums.net/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   I Have Just Seen... VI (http://www.oddworldforums.net/showthread.php?t=21092)

Vyrien 12-30-2012 05:48 PM

:

Princess Tutu follows Duck, a duck who was transformed into a young girl and takes ballet at a private school.
I'm sold.

Dynamithix 01-01-2013 08:41 AM

I've almost finished the seventh season of The Office and dear god has the quality dropped from the first four seasons, I don't think I'll even bother with the final seasons. It's still an ok show and sort of fun to watch if you're bored but I think the show really suffered from Jim and Pam getting together, I mean one of the reasons I really liked the first seasons was because their relationship was so awkward with Roy involved in it but then they just screwed it up. You could say the same happened to Frasier, but then again they had the whole Daphne and Niles thing going for way longer.

Some characters in the show are still gold though like Stanley, Toby and Ryan, but they also got some really fucking stupid characters like Erin, Holly, Andy (fuck that guy) and numerous others. Even Dwight has been pretty shit for quite some time now. But yeah, probably won't watch the last seasons unless I'm really bored.

Queen Skillya 01-01-2013 09:58 AM

:

()
I've almost finished the seventh season of The Office and dear god has the quality dropped from the first four seasons

That's true of many shows these days. Fringe, Heroes, Breaking Bad, etc.

Dynamithix 01-01-2013 10:10 AM

I wouldn't say Breaking Bad has taken a turn for the worse, actually I thought that the first half of the fifth season was really interesting. Can't say about the other ones.

Mr. Bungle 01-01-2013 10:12 AM

Don't you fucking dare lump Breaking Bad in with Fringe and Heroes. I will desecrate your family values.

MA 01-01-2013 06:27 PM

watched The Hobbit.

it was alright. enjoyed it.

yep.

OANST 01-02-2013 06:03 AM

Yeah....Let's talk about The Hobbit. Because it was not alright. It was bad. Very bad.

Let's start by discussing the pacing. There wasn't any. When the movie started I was enjoying it. The dwarves were silly, but not too silly. Some of the acting was bad (Ian McQueen or whatever he is called was awful as Gandalf) but for the most part it was going really well. But then the action sequences started, and they never ended. Everything that happened in the movie from that point on was just an excuse to set up another dull, poorly choreographed action sequence. Important plot points were sped through so that we could get more shots of the cast falling down things, and holy fuck do they fall down a lot of shit. It should have been called The Hobbit: Falling Down, but then Joel Schumacher, and Michael Douglas might have been offended. The only time that any given non-battle scene was given time to breath and actually exist is when they were at Rivendell, and my god was that an abomination of a scene. It completely pulls you out of the story with its dark and somber overtones, and also does this weird thing where it shows Saruman being untrustworthy well before he became untrustworthy.

And why the fuck would he add story elements and then blaze through the existing ones like they didn't matter? The Azog the Defiler shit was just fucking ridiculous. Not because it was necessarily bad, but because it turned a bloated film into an almost unwatchable, obese snorefest. Why would you treat the Gollum part of the story (arguably the most important part of the story) so flippantly, barely giving it any dramatic weight at all, but spend almost an hour going back, and forth with a fucking goblin that you made up, you stupid, fat shit?

Peter Jackson doesn't understand that action scenes don't create drama. So, he hamfistedly shoved about 4000 of them into this over long piece of shit. Which wouldn't be so bad if

a. There wasn't actual drama readily available

or

b. They were well done instead of just a lot of falling down.

MeechMunchie 01-02-2013 08:57 AM

Yeah, it was alright.

I saw Life of Pi. I quite liked it.

Then again, I was with a http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7...rzd8o1_100.gif girl so I was fairly cheerful anyway.

Dynamithix 01-02-2013 09:31 AM

Indie Game: The Movie.

It was pretty interesting and Team Meat seem like very cool guys. Phil Fish on the other hand, jesus christ what a fucking whining hipster, okay, I get that he had a ton of stress because Fez was very hyped and he had been working on it for a very long time but still, ugh. Jonathan Blow seems like such a weirdo, when Braid got extremely good reviews and people loved it he just got plain depressed about it, what the hell. But yeah, interesting to see what they went through to get their first major games published.

Wings of Fire 01-02-2013 09:32 AM

I don't understand why anyone would pay money for that kind of vanity project.

Dynamithix 01-02-2013 09:41 AM

Me neither, but it was a part of the latest Humble Bundle so I figured why not watch it.

Vyrien 01-02-2013 09:45 AM

I got it as part of the Humble Bundle too, haven't watched it, I'd rather spend my time playing their games. The only ones I'd be interested in would be Team Meat anyway.

Wings of Fire 01-02-2013 09:47 AM

I love the idea of self gratifying circlejerk vanity project in a 'humble' bundle.

OANST 01-02-2013 09:49 AM

WoF is so angry these days.

OANST 01-02-2013 09:56 AM

No idea how I double posted.

Queen Skillya 01-02-2013 01:56 PM

:

()
No idea how I double posted.

Magic. Actually I think you must be Jewish.

:

()
Yeah....Let's talk about The Hobbit. Because it was not alright. It was bad. Very bad.

Peter Jackson doesn't understand that action scenes don't create drama. So, he hamfistedly shoved about 4000 of them into this over long piece of shit.

Peter Jackson is reminding me more and more of George Lucas and that is sad.

scrabface 01-03-2013 03:29 AM

:

()
Yeah....Let's talk about The Hobbit. Because it was not alright. It was bad. Very bad.

Let's start by discussing the pacing. There wasn't any. When the movie started I was enjoying it. The dwarves were silly, but not too silly. Some of the acting was bad (Ian McQueen or whatever he is called was awful as Gandalf) but for the most part it was going really well. But then the action sequences started, and they never ended. Everything that happened in the movie from that point on was just an excuse to set up another dull, poorly choreographed action sequence. Important plot points were sped through so that we could get more shots of the cast falling down things, and holy fuck do they fall down a lot of shit. It should have been called The Hobbit: Falling Down, but then Joel Schumacher, and Michael Douglas might have been offended. The only time that any given non-battle scene was given time to breath and actually exist is when they were at Rivendell, and my god was that an abomination of a scene. It completely pulls you out of the story with its dark and somber overtones, and also does this weird thing where it shows Saruman being untrustworthy well before he became untrustworthy.

And why the fuck would he add story elements and then blaze through the existing ones like they didn't matter? The Azog the Defiler shit was just fucking ridiculous. Not because it was necessarily bad, but because it turned a bloated film into an almost unwatchable, obese snorefest. Why would you treat the Gollum part of the story (arguably the most important part of the story) so flippantly, barely giving it any dramatic weight at all, but spend almost an hour going back, and forth with a fucking goblin that you made up, you stupid, fat shit?

Peter Jackson doesn't understand that action scenes don't create drama. So, he hamfistedly shoved about 4000 of them into this over long piece of shit. Which wouldn't be so bad if

a. There wasn't actual drama readily available

or

b. They were well done instead of just a lot of falling down.

I am afraid you're right.
plus it was totally unnecessary to bloat the plot out to three movies, at least you shouldn't expect that he'd rush through the scenes. there is more than enough time for atmosphere and character development, but they screwed it.
the hobbit shouldn't be that epic in the first place. (including the music)
even when out of the place, I enjoyed the scenes with radagast.

I still prefer the deitch version of the hobbit



edit:
I just realized, I repeated what you said.

Queen Skillya 01-03-2013 03:49 AM

:

()
I am afraid you're right.
plus it was totally unnecessary to bloat the plot out to three movies, at least you shouldn't expect that he'd rush through the scenes. there is more than enough time for atmosphere and character development, but they screwed it.
the hobbit shouldn't be that epic in the first place. (including the music)

I care about The Hobbit for one reason: Smaug. If he looks like a shitty generic dragon than I'm going to be pissed.

scrabface 01-03-2013 04:04 AM

:

()
I care about The Hobbit for one reason: Smaug. If he looks like a shitty generic dragon than I'm going to be pissed.

Benedict Cumberbatch's voice will make my loins vibrate.

Vyrien 01-03-2013 05:31 AM

He looked pretty shitty and generic on the original cover and in the Tolkien bestiary, how do you define a non-generic dragon?

OANST 01-03-2013 05:34 AM

I like Ursula LeGuin's dragons. I like Ursula LeGuin.

Ursula LeGuin.

Sekto Springs 01-03-2013 07:42 AM

Just to be clear, Peter Jackson didn't make up Azog, he was one of the characters from the appendices that played a large part in the Dwarves' history. Peter Jackson did however totally fuck up Azog's backstory by keeping him alive. Tolkien wrote that he was killed in battle, and it was his son Bolg who pursued the Dwarves during the events of The Hobbit, leading up to the big battle at the end.

I know based on behind-the-scenes material that Jackson intends on including Bolg, so... he kind of has to kill Azog at some point or Bolg's character will have no motivation whatsoever to meet Thorin in battle.

Dynamithix 01-03-2013 12:12 PM

I watched Skyfall. It was alright, Javier Bardem was quite good.

Mac Sirloin 01-03-2013 01:13 PM

I've seen a lot of movies lately so if you don't want to read all of this good for you, you lovely petunia. But read it all anyway because it's probably 3 AM.

Firstly, Les Miserables. I love Les Miserables, I saw the musical when I was 12 or 13 and it really spoke to me. It told me that I need to grow up to be a swarthy disgusting Inn owner.
I saw the movie twice, once before Django and John Dies and once after. My opinion about it changed somewhat when I decided I liked Eponine's story and wasn't just bored because it was a love story. Hugh Jackman was an excellent Jean Valjean and his song and dance background totally made his casting a wise choice. I do not cry at movies, but I cried when he made his promise to Fantine and at the end. Although none of his performances really topped the opening number of Look Down, but we'll get to the opening in a bit. Easily just as good as Hathaway. Even better given the number of songs he sang. Anne Hathaway as Fantine was incredible, like I said I cried bitch tears at her and Jackman's performances, although 'I Dreamed a Dream' was probably the best individual performance in the entire film, her acting rheld the character together just as well. I hope they get married and have little operatic babies.

Sacha Baron cohen was very funny. Not a breakout performance at all, he simply filled the bitterly silly role of Thenardier to a T and brought a fairly vicious energy to the character. He's a greasy hairball and a coward but he's absolutely sinister. Helena Bonham Carter reprised her role as 'Crazy bitch who is mean to kids' and did an excellent job of it. Once again her performance wasn't particularly above the bar (especially compared to Jackman, Hathaway and Colm Wilkinson) but she entertained and gods willing that's all I'll ever ask of the Thenardiers.

Russel Crowe and Amanda Seyfried were the weakest of the lot for entirely different reasons. Crower is no singer but had a very nice way of blending some spoken word and shoutsinging into a domineering antagonist, bulling his way through some numbers with sheer acting force and ultimately winning me over. I like Russel Crowe as Javert. It was good casting. Maybe if they do a full adaption of Hugo's novel he should be recycled for it, but again, he's no singer. Seyfried played the adult Cosette, paradoxical to the actress who played young Cosette who did an excellent job Seyfried just kind of flounced around and cooed the occasional song into Marius's face. She played the role of 'Beautiful Girl' very well though. I give Amanda Seyfried in 19th century ladyclothes two thumbs way up. And also my dick.

Now that I'm done spooging over the performances, we'll talk about the film itself. It was kind of shit. Not particularly. Not even 'bad'. But so much of the movie was just closeups on the acto'rs faces for minutes at a time. It makes sense given they recorded live, but the most energetic song is a 90 second ditty by Gavroche (ALSO AN EXCELLENT PERFORMANCE!!!) where he rambles around Paris harassing rich people and giving us the roughest idea of a layout. Thus we return to Look Down. Look Down is one of my favourite songs from Les Mis. It sets the tone perfectly and the opening shot of Jackman and his other prison slaves hauling a shipwreck in is positively epic in scope. It set the mood for a cinematic musical that fell completely flat when you are spending a good 2 and a half hours staring into Russel Crowes soulless eyes.

If you like Les Miserables (and have seen the musical), see this and form an opinion yourself. If you haven't seen the musical, skip this and see it the next chance you get.

John Dies At The End
Ohhhh boy. Six years of waiting, six years of slobbering over every teaser, news slice and scrap of a screenshot I've been given, but was it worth it? Well yeah, I fucking love John Dies At The End. Are you a stupid moron or something? They change the sequence and pacing of the book to accommodate the run time, but they packed so much from the novel into it I feel that it's 2 hours worth of every penny. This is not for you if you're not into horror, but if you ARE into horror and some unique humor slam this masterpiece into your eyeballs ASAP. The one thing I missed, the one thing cut from the novel that really should have been kept in was the Cockroach man. I hope the DVD has my damn cockroach man or I'll be pissed. Still a riot and totally worth doing drugs beforehand.

Django Unchained
It was 45 minutes too long and thus I don't remember jack shit about other than Jamie Foxx's taint, Christoph Waltz stealing the fucking show, and the entire thing being worth it for the final scene. I'm tempted to say this is the one you should see out of any of these, but I'd rather you pay to support John Dies since Django will do well no matter what. Spike Lee can suck out my farts, Django Unchained rules the fucking school.

OANST 01-03-2013 01:16 PM

I can't wait for John Dies to open in theaters here. I'm going opening day.

Have you read This Book is Full of Spiders yet?

Mr. Bungle 01-03-2013 01:19 PM

I don't know if I should see Django or John Dies. Help.

Sekto Springs 01-03-2013 01:29 PM

For some reason I thought John Dies At The End was already out.

Mac Sirloin 01-03-2013 01:38 PM

Yep, I finished it about two or three weeks ago. I felt like the first novel was much stronger and (more importantly) funnier. After seeing the John Dies movie I think I understand what my problem with This Book is Full of Spiders was. John Dies is full of a lot of really...effects dependent scenes if you were to put it in cinematic context. The aforementioned cockroach man is a good example. This Book is Full of Spiders was a bit less populated by horrible creepy crawlies but had a good scope to it. It was neat to be all over Undisclosed at once seeing this shit happen.

The 'Alcoholic Redemption' of John Cheese was pretty god damn silly though.
:

()
I don't know if I should see Django or John Dies. Help.

Joihn Dies because
A) It's on iTunes/On Demand/SUPER SPECIAL MYSTERY MOVIE COLLECTING METHOD so you could possibly watch it right now. RIGHT. NOW.
B) Said On Demand price will be cheaper than a Django ticket unless it's Toonie Tuesday but it's not because today's Thursday.
C) You'll be supporting an awesome Horror movie maker and not god damn Quentin Tarantino. They're both good, but fuckin' Tarantino, man.
:

()
For some reason I thought John Dies At The End was already out.

On Demand, it's in theatres on the 27th.

Queen Skillya 01-03-2013 05:48 PM

:

()
He looked pretty shitty and generic on the original cover and in the Tolkien bestiary, how do you define a non-generic dragon?

Give him ear piercings, a rad nose ring, etc. because anything out of the norm for a western dragon would do for me.

My eyes are bleeding over what they have just witnessed. I've just seen more set photos of the life-sized Smaug. To say it looks like shit so far would be an understatement.

Vyrien 01-03-2013 05:59 PM

I don't think making him a punk was part of Tolkien's original vision. That said, I haven't seen the set photos so perhaps it would be preferable.

:

()
I like Ursula LeGuin's dragons. I like Ursula LeGuin.

Ursula LeGuin.

I watched Ghibli's adaptation of Tales from Earthsea a few days ago. It was shit.