What's new
By:
Filters

Random movie talky stuff.


Re: Random movie talky stuff.

chrisroxxx said:
You must be registered to see the links
is live, yaaay!
Click to expand...

...Huh. It looks ok enough, just hope that a decent amount of bollywood and Activision-era Blizzard tropes avoid it. Seems to mix between War1 and War2 at any rate, could be a fun ride.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

Pretty sure it'll only cover WC1/The Last Guardian, storywise, but yeah, the inclusion of gryphons and firearms is more in line with later WC games.

I wonder how close to the established lore it's going to be. I mean, WC1 had very bare-bones story telling, and was effectively retconned into a mix of the two campaigns it had when WC2 came around, and there was a lot added when the Last Guardian came out as well (such a good book, especially for a licenced one). At the end of the day, even the WoW environment is an "adaptation" of the lore (for one thing, the geography is too tiny to be "realistic". The movie is hopefully going to make distances longer and such).

I'm personally impressed with how they've managed to translate insanely overdimensioned WoW armour to live action, they look almost reasonable. And I quite like the look of the orcs' faces. Not quite as bestial as we've seen in the latest CGI cinematics for the game, but very expressive.

Anyway... yeah, it might actually not be shit. I am cautiously optimistic.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

...seen a couple b-movies lately, 'fire twister' with Casper Van Dien I did like him in 'Sharktopus vs.Whalewolf' so I checked it out, sadly had to quit watching that 'bs' after 20 mintues in...

Other 2 movies, this time I watched 'em fully are 're-kill' and 'call girl of cthulu'...the evil old guy in the cthulu flick, he looks familiar I feel he starred in a couple b-movies, hehe. :p
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

Funny how I go to see if I can't answer that for you and I get "call gir" in and it immediately pops up with your movie. Alas, without knowing which guy, hard to tell, though it looks like this was one and only credit for some folks. The guy who played Walter, though, did a few B's.

If you liked Casper Van Dien and want some not *quite* cheesy syfy, try Starship Troopers. Great for 40K fans, too (Humans vs Tyranids). Movie adaptation of Heinlin's novel but somehow I think not quite the vision he had in mind. Does touch on some of the deeper aspects (like having to serve in the military to become a citizen to be able to do stuff in society, televising an execution while censoring one of the aliens tearing up a cow.). It's not a fantastic Oscar vehicle by any means but I liked it. And if you do like it, check out the Roughnecks CGI cartoon. Takes the movie in a different direction, though brings in a lot of familiar characters.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

Yeah, I already watched all starship troopers movies, I think the first one undoubtedly is the best, points out the hilariosity of the military propaganda in a quite funny and gruesome way at the same time...

I think I did watch the animated comic series, but didn't like it much.
Also, there is an animation movie from 2014, I believe, called 'Starship Troopers Invasion', it has really decent animation and action, but when it comes to the deeper layers of any starhsip troopers flick, that being the perception of the military by society, in the animation movie they fail to deliver just that.
I guess all the money went into paying the animators and making more action scenes and 'money shots', no budget left to hire a good writer, hehe:rolleyes:. Still, I did watch it at least 3 times for the nicely done action scenes, alone!
 
Last edited:
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

The original is quite a classic, I liked the second somewhat though it was a very different type of movie and can see why alot of people hated it, then the third came out and all was well in the live action starship troopers universe.

The CGI film was... well it had decent action, but I'm really not into CGI tits if I'm not watching porn.

Unsure on comparing the arachnids to tyrranids though, one of the really big things they hammer into you when you read the fluff is that genestealer hybrids are a huge threat, seemingly normal humans that are actually working for the hive and can kill most PDF and even IG. Which I now realize is what they were trying to do with the second ST film, but didn't quite pull off.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

I think he was thinking more in general terms that specifics. Alien menace relying primarily on diverse bioforms, and all that.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

Finally got a chance to watch seventh son (God it seems like I saw trailers for this a couple years before it was finally released). Gotta say I was impressed after reading lackluster reviews. Having Jeff Bridges is a huge plus, the witches are more like the oriental equivalent 'Shugenja' I believe is the term and it was a nice break from the normal fireball and lightning chucking magic users in other films. The only shortcomings I found were: The big-bad has fish-hook fingernails, I guess this is an Asian thing but just looks derp to me. And it was too short, would have loved another hour. I would definitely watch a sequel, though it would probably not feature Jeff Bridges.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

There were a number of other problems as well, the whole romantic subplot is forced as all hell, and the main character suddenly achieves skills with a sword in a completely unbelievably quick time.

Really, Jeff Bridges holds the whole thing together with sheer, crazy old-man charisma, imho.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

Lol, pretty much. Needs moar Jeff Bridges.

I've noticed that romance is rather poorly done in most movies at this point, which is fine by me since even when it is well done it's just boring lies to distract from the fact that there's not more action. And that's what I meant about it being longer, I realize they wanted to add a sense of urgency but giving them only a week to beat the big bad? Figured with a 3 hour movie they might have stretched that time-line.

I'll admit I have a habit of ignoring faults with movies I generally like the feel of though.
 
Last edited:
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

There were some good gags that made the movie watchable for me, and sure, the fights with the witches were interesting, but all in all it failed in what a lot of fantasy movies fail in - they don't do world-building very well.

For example, you never learn anything of significance about the world they're in. Its politics, history, or anything, beyond specifically that related to the witches and the "spooks", and even that is pretty bare bones. What we see are a couple of massive cities, which apparently lie in the middle of nowhere, with no sizeable roads between them, or farmlands to support them. No to mention that the main character's family leaves their lake-land farm in the middle of a misty forest to visit one of those cities for their market sales, which apparently lies in a fucking desert. Climate does not work like that.

The same complaints can largely be levelled at other fantasy movies, like Eragon, the Name of the King, and so on. They don't take themselves seriously, and so feel disjointed and... staged, which a good fantasy movie avoids (LotR being a good example, GoT being a tv-series example of good world-building).
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

If we are going to start talking about cheesy movies were we are fighting witches, please reference "Hansel and Gretel, Witch Hunters" then come back and have a good laugh with the rest of us.

Might also be worth mentioning that "In the name of the king" is subtitled "A Dungeon Siege Story," with Dungeon Siege being a RTS/hackyslashy game from the early 00's and it's directed by....*drummmmmmrollll* Uwe Boll. Not that it automatically gets a free pass in that regard, but still.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

Not sure why Uwe Boll should get a more lenient critique, if anything, the point should be pushed harder.

That being said, I really liked the design of the peasant houses in the beginning of the movie, and the forest ninjas are pretty cool, so it's not all bad.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

Crawdaddy said:
No to mention that the main character's family leaves their lake-land farm in the middle of a misty forest to visit one of those cities for their market sales, which apparently lies in a fucking desert. Climate does not work like that.
Click to expand...

It's rare, but actually quite possible given the mountainous terrain as significant mountain chains are known to separate climates quite drastically. If you look at the Hawaiian islands you can see several different climates all within 100 miles of each other, though that has to do with different factors.

Though you're right, I was like 'They're in a desert now? How far did they travel?' And then when the family showed up I was all 'Huh why did they go that f...? Oh monsters, cool!'

And yeah, Hansel & Gretel lost me the second I saw guns. It felt very out of place to have guys with shotguns in ye-olde-town out in the middle of nowhere. Not to mention somehow they managed to figure out diabetus and keep the male protag from dying from it.
 
Last edited:
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

Guns have been around for quite a while though, when is the movie supposed to be set? 1600-1700s?

EDIT: Not implying it's not a incoherent movie, btw.
 
Last edited:
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

Not sure, but it had that ye-olde-town feel like a medievil (SP? FUUU can't get the damn thing to stop with the red) time frame. And yes firearms have been around for quite some time, but not with shell-casings (In a rush and can't remember the technical term for individual pre-packaged bullets) which you need for shotguns to be possible. I was complaining about this to someone else and they'd brought that up, I should be more specific that they're using pseudo-modern guns.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

super_slicer said:
It's rare, but actually quite possible given the mountainous terrain as significant mountain chains are known to separate climates quite drastically. If you look at the Hawaiian islands you can see several different climates all within 100 miles of each other, though that has to do with different factors.

Though you're right, I was like 'They're in a desert now? How far did they travel?' And then when the family showed up I was all 'Huh why did they go that f...? Oh monsters, cool!'

And yeah, Hansel & Gretel lost me the second I saw guns. It felt very out of place to have guys with shotguns in ye-olde-town out in the middle of nowhere. Not to mention somehow they managed to figure out diabetus and keep the male protag from dying from it.
Click to expand...

Hells, my town literally went from 70 degrees and sunny to blizzard in the span of 24 hours, so the whole "different climate" thing doesn't really bother me all that much.

And H&G is a movie that you go into not taking too seriously. It's kind of like VanHelsing and, well, anything by Uwe Boll. Or made for SyFy. As the cuddlebuddy put it about H&G "It's a bad film. But it's a great movie." Although what I didn't like about the "modernization" thing was "Hansel has diabetes. Nice hook." *movie conveniently forgets about his injections until the bossfight at the end* *sigh*

crawdaddy said:
Not sure why Uwe Boll should get a more lenient critique, if anything, the point should be pushed harder.
Click to expand...

Mostly because it's a given that Uwe Boll produces complete and utter crap and whenever his name is attached to a movie, critiquing it is pretty much a waste of time.
 
Re: Random movie talky stuff.

Hey, we all have limits to our ability to believe what a fiction is trying to sell us. And I can stomach a protagonist or even an antagonist having access to advanced technology, hand-waving it by saying 'they're a special exception', but when it's a number of random nameless villagers I just can't hand-wave it anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top