Switch to full style
Primary discussion forum. Also, feel free this use as a hangout for fans of the funny non-story based comics.
Post a reply

Re: Television and Movies

Mon Jul 29, 2013 9:57 pm

I hope the antagonists are Japanese...or Asian, racists don't see the difference.
On a slightly more serious note. I'd cry(joy), if I saw a kamekaze reference.

Re: Television and Movies

Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:33 pm

*kamikaze, dood

and I think that'd be kinda distasteful

Re: Television and Movies

Tue Jul 30, 2013 6:16 am

woops

It'd be distasteful depending on how they go about it.

Re: Television and Movies

Tue Jul 30, 2013 10:33 am

How would they make depictions of suicide bombings tasteful?

Re: Television and Movies

Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:47 pm

I don't know lol, but nothing is impossible. It could just be a picture on wall.

Re: Television and Movies

Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:54 pm

I think they would be a statue in japan saying in memory of Kamikaze.

Re: Television and Movies

Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:41 am

Has anyone seen RIPD?

Re: Television and Movies

Wed Jul 31, 2013 12:19 pm

The MIB rip-off? Nope.

Re: Television and Movies

Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:05 pm

And that's the end of RIPD in this thread.

Re: Television and Movies

Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:17 pm

Oh, if only Randori's post was funnier, that would've been a hilarious series of posts. Nice touch tho, OrangeBee.

Re: Television and Movies

Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:55 am

Mathias wrote:Has anyone seen RIPD?

Yeah

It's not as "bad" as the reviews would portray it. It's just the epitome of generic, forgettable and mediocrity.

Re: Television and Movies

Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:50 pm

Re: Television and Movies

Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:07 pm

EagleMan wrote:It's not as "bad" as the reviews would portray it. It's just the epitome of generic, forgettable and mediocrity.

So like 2/3 of all Hollywood movies in the last 4-5 years?

Re: Television and Movies

Thu Aug 01, 2013 7:12 pm

Except distilled into one movie.

Re: Television and Movies

Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:58 pm

:(

Re: Television and Movies

Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:56 am

So, just curious but has anyone here seen the first Percy Jackson film? If you have, are you planning on seeing the second one?

Re: Television and Movies

Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:58 am

The one where a kid dosen't know is a god and at the end fight against Hermes? There is a second one?

Re: Television and Movies

Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:07 am

Yes    (Close but it wasn't Hermes, it was his son)    The second one is called The Sea of Monsters, and I'll admit that it caught me off guard (It's been 3 years since the first one).

Re: Television and Movies

Fri Aug 02, 2013 2:33 am

Cerulean wrote:So, just curious but has anyone here seen the first Percy Jackson film? If you have, are you planning on seeing the second one?

I've seen the first one. I imagine I'll see the next one eventually at some point, but there's no compelling reason to go see it.

Re: Television and Movies

Fri Aug 02, 2013 4:01 am

I've seen the 1st film and, to be honest, I really disliked the film. Yes, I read all the books (even the spin-off series). Everyone: THERE'S A SPIN-OFF SERIES??

I know, you're all gonna say "Movies based on books are never accurate" but this movie went waaaay off the book. I can rant about this film for hours, but I don't want to make a huge post. Better to talk that write, but you catch my drift.

I will be watching Sea of Monsters as my fandom for the film overcame me, but I won't have high hopes for the accuracy.

Re: Television and Movies

Fri Aug 02, 2013 4:35 am

Randori wrote:I've seen the 1st film And,Yes, I read all the books

I know, you're all gonna say "Movies based on books are never accurate" but this movie went waaaay off the book. I can rant about this film for hours, but I don't want to make a huge post. Better to talk that write, but you catch my drift.

I agree, some of the plot points that were extremely important later in the series were just cut out. It's hard to just watch it without thinking "oh they left this out or changed that" repeatedly. It was ok, but I'm clearly biased towards the books. If nothing else, it will be interesting to see how (or if) they try to fix it.

EagleMan wrote:I've seen the first one. I imagine I'll see the next one eventually at some point, but there's no compelling reason to go see it.

It will probably be a while before I get around to seeing it (reasons stated above and below)

Randori wrote: I will be watching Sea of Monsters but I won't have high hopes for the accuracy.

This pretty much sums up how I feel about the upcoming sequel. The few screenshots I've seen suggest some attempts at damage control, but still going in with low expectations (for accuracy).

Re: Television and Movies

Fri Aug 02, 2013 11:29 am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDngEnB1rQs

Basically, Cinema makes fun of the movies requested.

Re: Television and Movies

Fri Aug 02, 2013 6:23 pm

I don't really care for how accurate adaptations are, as long as the adaptation itself is good. Meaning it might not be a faithful adaptation, but if it's still a good movie, then it's a good movie.

Re: Television and Movies

Fri Aug 02, 2013 10:08 pm

I tend to read the book before watching the adaptations (Harry Potter excluded). So I end up paying more attention to the changes instead of just enjoying the movie. The last adaptation that I considered to be a good movie was The Hunger Games. Do you (or anyone else) have some examples of adaptations that were pretty good despite changing some of the elements from the book? If you want, you can also list good/bad adaptations.

Re: Television and Movies

Sat Aug 03, 2013 12:12 am

Fight Club. Author says the movie is better than the book.

The Shining was changed significantly. Stephen King, the author, was enraged by it.

The Mist, also adapted from a book by King, had a very different ending, and King has said he wish he thought of something so brilliant.

A Clockwork Orange omitted the last chapter from the book, and I feel it was significantly better for it. The author of the book, Burgess, was concerned about this, as the last chapter is redemptive in nature. He blames the American publisher though and not Kubrick, the film's director, as Kubrick based it upon the American version of the book which left that final chapter out, and Kubrick was not aware of that until the screenplay was mostly done. Burgess did praise the lead actor of the film and its use of music however. So he had mixed feelings on his adaptation. Kubrick was also the director of The Shining.

All pretty well reviewed movies, or at least currently they are all viewed as good films.
Post a reply