Iambaytor Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 I'm a Christian, not a creationist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Did you say in the Evolution and You thread that you didn't believe humans evolved from non-human apes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 (edited) I put forward the theory that our common ancestry was maybe a bit earlier than some sort of proto-ape-man and then I pointed out that this theory was in no way based on my religious beliefs. I was basically saying I don't believe in bigfoot. Even if I was a creationist I'm not going to not like a movie just because it insults my philosophical beliefs, that would be you. I actually laughed at the Jesus shooting Darwin thing. However when a comedy is lazy and unfunny, I do find that incredibly offensive. Edited October 18, 2012 by Iambaytor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cathy Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Ok, so this isn't a movie, it's a t.v. show. I've been watching Once Upon A Time on Netflix. It's not exactly supposed to be a show about Fables, but from how Panch explained it to me, it was originally supposed to be. I forget what he told me exactly. Anyway, I only read the first two trades of Fables, but this show reminded me A LOT about it. Very similar. Besides that, it's good. Acting is fair. They're airing the second season now. But I'm only halfway through the first. The twist is that no one remembers they are fairy tale characters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hakujin Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 ^^I had a group of students last year that were VERY in to both of those fairy tale shows; I can't remember what the other one is called. Anyway, I never got around to checking either out, but I may add tot he queue to check out on a rainy day... I finally got around to watching the Morgan Spurlock Comic-Con documentary. Hondonians won't likely find much new info in it, but it's still a very fun watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Grimm is the other show, but it's really more of a Buffy the Vampire Slayer clone with were-animals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 BAM! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keth Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Now we're cooking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 I assume Logan will comment on this once he stops ejaculating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted November 3, 2012 Author Share Posted November 3, 2012 whoah, that's...to give characters like that a name like that was a really excellent move, i hope it pays off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrizzle Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Man, I hope he comes through here. As in, this actually happens and they let him do his thing. Film has not been a friend to some of those characters, and I'd love to see them finally get a fair shake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panch Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 DC responds to Guardians of the Galaxy with... monsters? Well played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted December 22, 2012 Author Share Posted December 22, 2012 posted? Marvel Phase 1 boxset Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted March 4, 2013 Author Share Posted March 4, 2013 Christopher Nolan is in charge of the DCU Movie Universe, Bale may return for JL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C_U_SPACECOWBOY Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 (edited) Christopher Nolan is in charge of the DCU Movie Universe, Bale may return for JL Making a JLA movie in the 'Nolanverse' is a phenominally terrible idea. And you know who agrees with me? Christopher Nolan: Exerpt from an interview with the LA times from the summer of '08. GB: Chris, this summer, "Iron Man" and "The Incredible Hulk" signaled the true start of the "crossover era" in comic-book films with Marvel Studios putting an emphasis on the fact that their heroes coexist in the same world. DC and Warner Bros. may embrace a similar strategy, especially if the Justice League film project is revived. Does that concern you? Your Gotham doesn’t seem suited to that. Nolan: I don’t think our Batman, our Gotham, lends itself to that kind of cross-fertilization. It goes back to one of the first things we wrangled with when we first started putting the story together: Is this a world in which comic books already exist? Is this a world in which superheroes already exist? If you think of "Batman Begins" and you think of the philosophy of this character trying to reinvent himself as a symbol, we took the position — we didn’t address it directly in the film, but we did take the position philosophically — that superheroes simply don’t exist. If they did, if Bruce knew of Superman or even of comic books, then that’s a completely different decision that he’s making when he puts on a costume in an attempt to become a symbol. It’s a paradox and a conundrum, but what we did is go back to the very original concept and idea of the character. In his first appearances, he invents himself as a totally original creation. GB: That doesn’t lend itselt to having him swing on a rope across the Metropolis skyline. Nolan: No, correct, it’s a different universe. It’s a different way of looking at it. Now, it’s been done successfully, very successfully, in the comics so I don’t dispute it as an approach. It just isn’t the approach we took. We had to make a decision for "Batman Begins." GB: A different path… Nolan: Yes, completely different. It would have given a very, very different meaning to what Bruce Wayne was leaving home to do and coming back home to do and putting on the costume for and all the rest. We dealt with on its own terms: What does Batman mean to Bruce Wayne, what is he trying to achieve? He has not been influenced by other superheroes. Of course, you see what we’re able to do with Joker in this film is that he is able to be quite theatrical because we set up Batman as an example of intense theatricality in Gotham. It starts to grow outward from Batman. But the premise we began with is that Batman was creating a wholly original thing. To be honest, we went even further than the comics on this point. I can’t remember at what point in the comics history the idea came about that he was a fan of Zorro as a kid. I haven’t researched that, but I don’t believe it goes back terribly far.” GB: I remember the movie-theater marquee with a Zorro film in Frank Miller’s “The Dark Knight Returns” in 1986. … Nolan: It definitely goes back before that. I’m pretty sure. I’ll have to ask [DC Comics President] Paul Levitz about it, but my sense is that it does go back further … but either way, we changed it. We didn’t have young Bruce going to see Zorro because a character in a movie watching a movie is very different than a character in a comic book watching a movie. A comic-book character reading a comic book is more analogous to a character in a movie watching a movie. It creates a deconstructionist thing that we were trying to avoid. That was one reason. But another reason was to remove Zorro as a role model. We wanted nothing that would undermine the idea that Bruce came up with this crazy plan of putting on a mask all by himself. That allowed us to treat it on our own terms. So we replaced the Zorro idea with the bats to cement that idea of fear and symbolism associated with bats. GB: Which you did by putting Bruce and his parents in the opera house watching "Die Fledermaus," which also gave you an opportunity to enhance the operatic feel of the film. Nolan: Precisely. That took us into that very realm that seemed to work on screen. GB: You’ve said you aren’t sure what you next project will be. But clearly Warner Bros. looks at Batman as a core part of their movie business, perhaps now more than ever, and there are marketplace pressures on them to schedule the next installment of the franchise. Are you getting a lot of pressure to make a decision? Nolan: They’re being extremely gracious. I have a very good relationship with the studio. They know that I really needed to go on holiday and take some time to figure what I want to do next. They’ve been very respectful of that, which is terrific and one of the reasons I enjoy working with Warner Bros. GB: The nominations for the 81st Academy Awards will be announced in January. How meaningful would it be for the cast and crew of "The Dark Knight" if the late Heath Ledger is nominated for best supporting actor? Nolan: I think the thing that has always been important to me in light of Heath’s death is the responsibility I’ve felt to his work. The responsibility of crafting the film in such a way that his performance came across the way he intended. Clearly, that has been the case. That’s one of the reasons I take such pride in the film. I felt a great wave of relief, really, as people first started to see the performance and it was clear that they were getting the performance. It’s easy to forget with everything that’s happened what an enormous challenge it was for Heath to take on this iconic role. He rose to that challenge so admirably that any expression of people being excited or moved by his performance is a wonderful thing. Whatever form that takes. People coming to see his performance and getting it. It’s been extremely satisfying for all of us already. Anything that adds to that would be wonderful. – Geoff Boucher Edited March 4, 2013 by C_U_SPACECOWBOY 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrizzle Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Multi-millionaire decides artistic integrity and vision is slightly less important than an island full of money, and begins to see his younger self as over idealistic and naive. News at 11. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted March 5, 2013 Author Share Posted March 5, 2013 yeah, those quotes do come from a delusively pre-Avengers time, heh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hakujin Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Yeesh. Not sure if want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alive she cried Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Let me be the first then...huzzah! If this is true, we ain't getting' another Green Lantern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Was that possibility even on the table? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 He could just say that all the other heroes popped up after Batman, I mean he did already write/produce the new Superman and I think that's mainly what they want him to do. I mean, you may see this as ridiculous but Nolan's Bat-verse operated on some rather silly comics-logic whenever it suited him and it really wasn't incredibly different from the regular Batman universe where he does co-exist with other superheroes. I mean, does Daredevil quit fighting crime just because his own city is filled with 700 other heroes with cooler powers at any given moment? I think Nolan was just blowing smoke out his ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keth Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Ant man https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcO3BMhbs54&feature=youtube_gdata_player Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycaon Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Blocked by Disney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 This place still has it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 5, 2013 Author Share Posted May 5, 2013 Luke Evans Is... The Crow! There have been a number of actors in talks and names very loosely attached but it looks like Relativity Media have made their decision and the actor who will play The Crow in the reboot of James O'Barr's dark tale of vengeance is none other than... Welsh actor Luke Evans! Evans was the original choice of Spanish filmmaker F. Javier Gutierrez, but he had been busy, having been cast in Dracula Year Zero and as Bard the Bowman in Peter Jackson's The Desolation of Smaug while other actors in the mix included James McAvoy, Tom Hiddleston and Alexander Skarsgard. Instead, they decided to push back the start of the movie until early 2014 to accommodate Evans, who next appears as the villain in the summer's anticipated Fast and Furious 6. Evans has only been on the scene a few years, his first big movie being Louis Letterier's Clash of the Titans in which he played the god Apollo. A year later he was one of The Three Musketeers in Paul W.S. Anderson's reimagining and then he stepped up to play the Greek God Zeus in Tarsem's Immortals. With this booking, Evans also has the distinction of being the only actor (so far) to appear in both The Raven and The Crow. He steps into the shoes of the late Brandon Lee who helped turn the original 1994 Alex Proyas-directed movie into a cult hit. also, since you're now wondering: this is why we can't have brandon anymore, according to wiki Weeks prior to the event, a scene had been filmed that required shells to be shown being loaded into the handgun. Rather than using dummy rounds, inexperienced crew members, pressured by time constraints, purchased live ammunition, removed the bullets, dumped the gunpowder, and then replaced the bullets back into the empty cartridges with the live primers still in place.[3][4] Unbeknownst to the crew, the bullet from one of the rounds became lodged in the barrel of the gun. It is believed that someone on set was playing with the gun, pulled the trigger and inadvertently caused the live primer to fire; this would have resulted in the bullet moving a couple of inches into the barrel of the gun. When the time came to film the scene where Funboy shoots Eric, the same gun was loaded with blank cartridges. As the production company had sent the firearms specialist home early, responsibility for the guns was given to a prop assistant who was not aware of the rule for checking all firearms before and after any handling. Therefore, the barrel was not checked for obstructions when it came time to load it with the blank rounds.[3][4] When the gun was fired, the propellant in the blank round – which is used to give the visible effect of a gunshot – dislodged the bullet and propelled it through Lee's abdomen and into his spine, where it lodged. The injury caused massive blood loss. i honestly hope that crew never found work again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.