Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Griffith

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 385
1
Well, this thread is kind of a bummer, but I'll play because I literally made a mock up of what I DON'T want it to be:


Note: This dialogue is adapted from the Sam Neill TV miniseries vehicle Merlin (1998), which delightfully sucked and is probably best represented by this image.

But to the heart of the question at hand, I don't care as long as it's done well, and that includes things that on paper might seem like contrivances or cliches but are tailored in such a specific way as to be perfectly appropriate, fitting, and effectively surprising for the story. Anything can be done well, and doing something that's usually done poorly the right way can make for the best payoffs. Show us how it's done, Miura! :guts:

2
Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi
« on: Today at 04:15:51 PM »
This one is definitely more original than the previous two for better or worse. It kind of reminds me of a proper EU Star Wars story, since that's ultimately what these are, but complicated by the fact they gotta try to live up to the originals and substitute for "flagship" Star Wars movies instead of just being what they are.

3
Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi
« on: Today at 03:47:36 PM »
Well, I felt the same way over Rogue One. I put off seeing that for a year and I really don't understand the hype.

It might be better, or more worthwhile for fans, than Last Jedi, honestly! :ganishka: I think that's a trick though, because stuff like TFA and R1 are so steeped in familiar and unmistakable Star Wars iconography we don't reject it as a foreign body outright (this is very Star Warsy!). It may not be as good as the real thing, but at least it was cloned from the same DNA, whereas this one does a lot of familiar shit too, but it also has just enough new and different content to feel... a little off. =) Basically, people hate the continued recycling of the Death Star in principle, but it might be worth the practical "STAAARR WAAAARS" trade off!

BTW, you're a risk-taker quoting me directly where you can see my spoiler-tagged text! I even tried to keep those diplomatic for the most part though, just in case. :griffnotevil:

4
Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi
« on: Today at 03:32:53 PM »
Agreed on all ends with you.  Not sure how I feel about this movie yet.

It's not bad, but it doesn't really go anywhere either and pretty much ends where it basically could/should have started (and all the non-Luke/Rey/Kylo stuff, which was a lot of the 2.5 hours, wasn't interesting anyway and could have been chopped way down). I'm not sure what everyone is creaming their pants over. The Empire/middle chapter hype does not apply; what made that movie great is it deepened the characters and their relationships, not so here. I was neither thrilled nor offended by the film overall, "I'm not mad, just disappointed in you." :carcus:

Yoda was also the big highlight for me.  Loved that his behavior with Luke went unchanged. Followed by the sudden Luke-going-bye bye scene left me salty.  Beautiful way sure.  But still.  Maybe holding onto Luke for almost 40 years have something to do with that lol.

The tree scene was a weird moment, it provided the missing irreverent side of Yoda, but to the point of surreal self-satire (like was I watching new Star Wars or Spaceballs?). They basically just admit the force is a bunch of super thin BS they're either just re-recycling old dialogue for or making up as they go along, and that's why anyone can be a Jedi-like person or do anything one minute and nothing the next. So, while I did appreciate the underlying spirit of the scene (the Jedi are BS but that's not what matters), overall I didn't love or think it necessary for Yoda to show up and go all Reverend Lovejoy, "Luke, have you ever read this thing? Technically, we're not allowed to go to bathroom."

As for Luke... it's like they still never did figure out what to do with him. So, they kind of did nothing with him while trying to fulfill all our fan-tasies (bitter and maybe dark, grizzly teacher, Super Saiyan badass, full circle, or if you don't really want any of that, then he never left the couch!), but it amounted to treading water and just putting a cap on 30 years of... nothing. As rote and predictable as it would have been, they'd have been better off just having him show up at Starkiller Base in the third act of the last movie, or this one, since he still never showed up despite the cruel tease of his X-Wing (while we're recycling dialogue and moments and waiting for help, how about, "I'm Luke Skywalker, I'm here to rescue you!" coming in over the radio?). I'm seriously considering how one could edit these two movies together to make a better movie, basically tack fake Luke onto the end of TFA, which, again, are very Prequely thoughts. =)


My expectations have been appropriately leveled  :sad: I'll probably get a chance to see it this weekend, but if not, it'll be another week.

Maybe you'll enjoy it more than I did now. I hated TFA when I first saw it, but then became a convert. I don't think that's going to happen this time because it didn't get me that worked up wither way and I feel like I've already made my peace with it.

5
Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi
« on: Today at 06:17:28 AM »
It had a few nice ideas and moments, but also some that laughably flopped, and ultimately the payoffs underwhwlmed or disappointed me. I felt like all the charm of the new characters was gone and we were just left with their 1-dimensional selves cosplaying Star Wars like they were trying to avoid. All in all, it didn't really bother me or live up to my expectations of what it could be, I'm just sort of dispassionately ambivalent.

The most potential laid with the Kylo/Luke/Rey connection, specifically that dark recollection of Luke from Kylo's POV; they should have just had Luke go dark side instead of... Lukewarm and uninvolved. I will say, the shot of him walking out and confronting those AT-ATs was the best imagery in the movie and iconically done, but ultimately hollow and another example of just overwrought force powers, like Super Leia (there was actually a little prequel in this one's DNA, not the dopey action so much as dopey recitation of Star Warsy lines). I could go on forever second guessing all this stuff, but eh. Hey, I called Ren killing off Snoke to be Supreme Leader! But he still sucked after. =)

6
Video Games / Re: Games to look forward to!
« on: December 06, 2017, 04:08:50 PM »
my kid is certainly excited. I showed him the trailer this morning saying it would be out next year, and after school, his first question to me was "is Mega Man 11 out yet?" It's going to be a long year.

 :ganishka:

WELL!!? :isidro: :???:

His other feedback from the trailer: "Oh no, moving platforms again?" (this kid gets it).

When he ascends to his proper place as a Mega Man Master one day he'll see those moving platforms and smile like Guts when a doomed horde of monstrosities foolishly approaches.


I have to say, I don't have that childlike enthusiasm for this one. It looks like NEW Super Mega Man Bros. or something, and it's clearly a successor more in the vein of Mega Man 7, 8, etc, if that, than the classics. Also, it feels a little perfunctory after such a wait (even MM10 had lost the novelty and felt redundant after the awesome return to form of 9), a Mega Man-like game with mediocre graphical update. A bit too little, too late for me perhaps. It also doesn't help that it's following Shovel Knight, which was basically the ultimate iteration of this specific style of game, including the two-player co-op I always dreamed of (BTW, it's still releasing new content!). Mega Man 11 just looks like another unessential MM variant.

7
Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: November 23, 2017, 04:43:06 PM »
I only meant that I haven't been compelled to see the game through to completion. I had the same hang-up with SMG2. Fun, but just didn't push me until the end. I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with the game or anything, I just kind of got my fill for the time being.

Ah, I always feel bad when I don't play/finish games, like it's my fault (I never understood your ability to drop a game even 90% through =); it's probably much healthier to see the game as not being sufficiently compelling to demand your time and attention. It's supposed to be entertaining, after all.

I have the 3DS, as well as every other console.

I don't know if this is a case more for or against just keeping it, but if you knew you wouldn't use it then sure I guess. Maybe I can borrow a Switch for Odyssey from my old boss; he got it and Zelda early but there's a better than decent chance he doesn't play it. My only fear is in that case he may have already given it to his nephew.

8
Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: November 23, 2017, 07:30:36 AM »
I haven't played it in about a week, if that says anything. Game's great! I am just not enticed to keep returning to it until it's done.

Hmmmm... "until it's done?" Does it need an update or DLC, or are you referring to something specific in your own playthrough?

No argument here, but FYI Yoshi's Island was only dubbed Super Mario World 2 by Nintendo of America's marketing department.

And Europe, but I don't think it's quite the same mess SMB2/Doki Doki Panic/Mario USA was. Mario World was also known as Mario Bros. 4 in Japan and, whatever the country, all these names are for marketing anyway, essentially (like Zelda III 2 being made 20 years later by different people). More importantly, Yoshi's Island was the next "Mario" game by the same team at Nintendo EAD and actually builds off from and lives up to its predecessor while being fresh and not recycling or watering down its assets and content (like JP SMB2 or SMG2). So, the SMW2 title is a truer designation than a lot of so called sequels even though the original game and title is also unique and the intention was likely to simultaneously spinoff on yet protect the Mario brand if it wasn't such a success (like every other Yoshi game =). Basically, NOA or whoever made the call got it right on that one.

I actually finished it completely. After having done so, I realized I would most likely not be picking my switch up for several more years so I sold it. I don't sell consoles, but I had absolutely no problem doing so with this one. It had two great games for me (BotW and SMO), but I just do not feel the need nor want to go back to them.

That's pretty radical; aren't they going to release other games in the next few years? I mean, I also feel like there's no reason to get a Switch now besides BotW and Odyssey (or just the latter if you have a Wii U), but I also kind of assumed I was just ignorant. What about the versatility, portability, etc?

Also, despite the critical raves, and even the praise here, it seems like Odyssey isn't setting your worlds on fire. Makes me wonder what exactly it's lacking.

Agreed. I just enjoyed both so much, itís hard to pick a favorite.

It's easy, just imagine if they were your children and ask yourself which you'd be more proud of. =)

I havenít, but itís on my list.

What else is currently on the list?

9
Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: November 22, 2017, 11:44:23 PM »
Comparing the fun I'm having in SMG2, I'd still say Odyssey has an edge in my books, though it's not a big gap. Yoshi is pretty damn entertaining.

Yeah, I'll be getting back to SMG2 soon, I got to the first Bowser fight just to see what it entailed and though it was impressively creative, I don't know that it was something better than the original. I also find the Star minimums to advance annoying this time despite the fact I'm electing to collect 120 in SMG. If you're going to emphasize the individual level progression more then don't throw up artificial barriers to that progression.

I've been playing Ni-Oh on PC (Aaz graciously got it for my birthday :badbone: ). No getting around it ó it's a Souls game set in 1500s era Japan, and it's really fucking good. It gets bonus points for feeling like a Vagabond-meets-Souls game, what with primary weapon options being dual katanas and the kusarigama. Definitely worth picking up for those inclined to both series.

Damn, I've been surpressing the urge to get it for now, which hasn't been too hard since I currently lack the time and money, but I bet I'd enjoy it. I'm still getting my gaming fix opportunistically with the Mario games I never played over the last few years (even Mario Run on my phone). I'm only a few stars away from 120 in Galaxy (but half of those will be the purple comet/coin ones I've been avoiding ugh :mozgus:) and I even picked up New SMB on the virtual console because I never played it for DS and despite it's mixed reputation it DID revitalize and reshape 2D Mario in a big way. I'm at world 3 and so far it's not so bad, but nothing special either. It's almost like they thought to do classic 2D again they has to limit their ambitions aside from the giant Mario gimmick.

BTW Switch Owners, how is Super Mario Odyssey treating you after spending some real time with it? Do I need to pay $350 for it or am I still good making do with my Wii U and waiting a decade like with these other Marios? =)

I finished playing Super Mario World yesterday (beat Bowser after clearing 96 levels first). I enjoyed it a lot. Iím having a hard time deciding which I liked better, SMB3 or SMW, so for now Iíll say I liked them both evenly. :serpico:

It's an interesting debate only because they do things a bit differently with SMB3 being a sprint (both in level design and because, let's face it, after the initial playthrough you're using those warp whistles =) of quick but endless imaginitive goodies and SMW being a marathon that bakes the imaginative goodies into every moment. I give it to SMW for being more substantial and timeless. As discussed not too long ago, that's still the pinnacle of Mario and platform gaming in my mind. I don't think SMB3 or really anything is better.

BTW,  have you already played SMW2: Yoshi's Island? It's a very different and worthy entry to the canon in its own right.

10
Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: November 15, 2017, 12:05:00 AM »
Still catching up on my Mario(s). Finished 3D World on Wii U, which had some fun but is still a pretty underwheming follow-up to 3D Land despite all the console gloss. I'm simultaneously replaying 3D Land since its also my favorite Mario since 64 because it's awesome. They should have just called it Super Mario 3D, like everything else on 3DS, instead of implying some secondary "travel version" status (especially because it was actually by the main Mario team and is technically more legit than A Link Between Worlds; they should just have called that Link's 3Dwakening =). 3D World conversely doesn't deserve the lofty elevation implied by the, what should be sacrosanct, "World" designation; that's blasphemy and it should have more deservedly been subtitled "Puss in Boots" or something. :ganishka:

The Galaxies continue to impress and in context are clearly the evolutionary link between Mario 64 and 3D Land; controls and play areas designed like 64, but more course/goal oriented like 3D Land, albeit more loosely. So, for those that haven't played, it's like semi-open environments but you select from multiple obstacle courses designed for each that act more like linear stages (you can run to the sides a bit, but you progress a certain way), which SMG2 made more explicit before 3D Land made it literally Mario levels again. Too bad I couldn't just refer to this handy chart before to know that:



So far I prefer the looser creativity of the original Galaxy to the streamlined refinements and extra features of SMG2; I like the charms of the Observatory hub (including the wistful Yoshi's Island-styled backstory) and the overall dedication to the space theme, whereas SMG2 is basically just floating 3D Mario courses made in half measure with classic Mario concepts and the Galaxy engine. I see this debated where SMG2 is either the perfect version of the Galaxy concept or merely derivative of it, and so far I'm in the latter camp and find myself drawn back to looking for more stars in SMG1 than desiring to progress in SMG2 at the moment. Anyway, I certainly see why Galaxy and its successor was such a successful iteration of Mario; plus, it's just larger than life and mindbending having Mario literally circumferencing planetoids and jumping between them changing gravity. If I keep playing and enjoying it so much I'm going to have to add it to my transcendent Marios (though it wouldn't bump 3D Land because while I see now what it owes to the Galaxies they're still different animals in my book, whatever Nintendon't says).

11
Berserk Miscellaneous / Re: New photo of Kentaro Miura
« on: November 14, 2017, 06:56:58 AM »
Beer with Miura... So jealous! :mozgus:

That's a pretty young and spry looking Miura too, ready to mingle. :ganishka:

12
Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: November 12, 2017, 07:55:00 AM »
I'm very late to this party, but I recently finished Nier Automata

Dude, we're trying to talk about Mario 3 and 64, leave your old games out of this and try to stay up with the times! =)

For what it's worth, Super Mario 3D Land was my favorite Mario game since 64. Odyssey is charming in many ways, and Galaxy was a truly great game (and Sunshine is greatly underrated), but I really had a blast with 3D Land that goes beyond that. Somehow it feels similar to what I experienced with Zelda: A Link Between Worlds. Just addictive fun that makes you play through it without end.

Yeah, I think the reason those two in particular share that trait is because they're both portable titles, but no lesser for it because the 3DS is so comparable to the Wii's, and as a result of it almost all the fat has been cut! Not necessarily for hardware limitations, but to make them better suited for instant gaming on the go. The irony is that's how all these games should be designed! Unfortunately I think there's a tendency or expectation to drag out the theatrics on the big AAA home titles that just isn't suited to Nintendo. Those two games are great and addictive because it's more pure gameplay you want and less slowing down and doing stuff you don't. I was reading some comparisons between 3D Land and 3D World and it basically came down to gameplay/design vs. hardware features. We all know which makes for a better game. More to the general topic, not every Mario, even the very good ones, and most are, can be transcendent. Or, more simply, they can't all be the best. And since I'm a nerd here's a list of my transcendent Marios:

Donkey Kong
Super Mario Bros.
Super Mario Bros. 3
Super Mario World
Super Mario 64

Other greats:

Yoshi's Island
Super Mario Galaxy
Super Mario Galaxy 2 (so far it seems like an expansion =)
Super Mario 3D Land

And most of the rest are still all very good games in their own right, just not the greatest among these. Example: I got to the final castle in 3D World the other nighy but it required like 50 more stars to open than I had to reach that point...  So, that's some fun, huh!?

13
Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: November 10, 2017, 11:33:02 PM »
The thing is, Mario 64 was one of the great watersheds in video game history. Galaxy was a great game, but obviously it could never have the same impact for those who saw the birth of 3D gaming.

I think that's why 3D Land resonated so much with me, it was a different way to do 3D Mario and like a perfect fusion of that with classic platforming. Its basically an alternative Mario 64 or what it could have been, and arguably it's a much truer translation of Mario to 3D. Anyway, I'll need to get back to 3D World eventually, but the cat powers and it's level/camera design emphasizing multiplayer don't appeal to me.

the birth of modern video games
I wouldn't go that far.
Have I overlooked something in gaming history?

Yeah... Zelda 64 was the birth of modern video games! :guts:

As much as I actually believe that to an extent, gaming is not so monolithic and there's plenty of genres and elements and that came before and after that define gaming today.

14
Speculation Nation / Re: Guts's Lineage
« on: November 09, 2017, 06:43:28 PM »
Am I missing something about Grunbeld? I'm not following you guys in this point.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I was just taking a tongue-in-cheek look at Guts practical "lineage" and took the opportunity to bust on Grunny because he's such a big, lovable dork.

15
Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: November 09, 2017, 04:32:24 PM »
My god... You're in for a treat. The sensation of long-jumping off a platform in that game, then being pulled back down by the gravity, it's such a good fucking design. Definitely my favorite Mario since 64, and so far, nothing in Odyssey has toppled the fun I had with Galaxy.

It's pretty great, and getting better as I go along and see all its tricks (I'm about a dozen stars away from getting the station moving...), but it's not smacking me in the face with transcendence as I expected (like it would naturally assert itself in the pecking order after SMB1, SMB3, SMW, Mario 64, and then... Galaxy! It's more just a proper sequel to Mario 64, which isn't a bad thing, but I don't think it's having the same impact on me now as audiences at its launch because I've played the "3D" games that followed and built on it. Also, because I played the ever-living shit out of Mario 64, like 120 stars, speed runs, glitches, making up your own little "movies" and having Mario act them out (:ganishka:), it was almost something more than a game at the time and I feel like I spent years exploring that world, to the point that I had hardly played another 3D Mario since until 3D Land, which was different enough to really grab me (like SMB3 and Mario 64 had a new perfect baby). The thing is, objectively, I recognize Galaxy as a bigger, better game and leap forward than any of those others since 64, but given that it's not resonating with me like it probably should, or would have in its day. So, I guess what I'm saying is I'm not disappointed in the game per se... but a bit by my reaction to it. Like I'm having fun but feel like I should be more awestruck, maybe I'll get there by the end. Sorry Mario Galaxy, it's not you, it's me.

16
Speculation Nation / Re: Guts's Lineage
« on: November 07, 2017, 08:04:31 PM »
Speaking of Guts lineage, lets look at his actual pedigree, or Guts' "father figures"/male role-models, ranked:

1. Godot - They didn't know each other long, but Godot is like Guts' father in adulthood when he still lives at home, and though Godot would like the young punk to move out of gaddam house already, he also cares about him. More importantly, in addition to being a good and decent man where it counts, Godot has no room for bullshit, and will call Guts out on his. He pretty much was there for and turned Guts' life around on multiple occassions. It wasn't ideal or even formal, there was almost no show of affection either way, but Godot was the best father Guts ever had.

2. Skull Knight - They're the two most badass fighters in the series following the same path to hell. They have a strong, if somewhat stilted, mentor/mentee relationship and are largely fighting the same fight, with Skull Knight showing Guts the way and saving his ass since he left Griffith's side. Skull Knight is pretty much the only character with the clout to act like Guts' daddy and get away.

3. Griffith - Shocking? Only that he's not higher, since arguably nobody has had a more profound impact on Guts and his life, for better and much, much worse. Griff "gave" Guts a place to belong, real friends and friendship, and a new way of looking at himself and the world. He influenced him a little TOO MUCH for their own good as it turns out, even turning the big lug into something of a warrior poet for a time. And then Griff took, almost, all of it away. Bad friend and another heartbreaking betrayel. No wonder Guts doesn't want to get close to anybody!

4. Gambino - Was Guts' actual, albeit begrudging, adoptive father of course. Raised, provided for, and taught Guts how to fight and survive despite being a big asshole that also imperiled him in the process. Then Gambino sold him out to a pedophile, tried to killed him, died by his sword, and got Guts ostracized by their band. Verdict: one bad dad, so despite the fatherly bonifides dropped to #4. You should be last, asshole.

5. Zodd - Time for some tough love! You might think I'm joking, but nobody has provided Guts a better example and measure on the battlefield. He also clearly admires and may even be... proud of Guts? He's even helped, fought alongside, and spared Guts on a few occasions, once after Guts basically threatened his master (tell me he doesn't have a soft-spot for him =). So, despite trying to kill him on multiple times, Zodd has otherwise displayed a surprising amount of fondness and even concern for Guts. Basically, Zodd would be proud to have a son like him.

6. Guts' Biological Father - ???, was he a warrior, a heretic, did he meet a similar fate as Guts' mother or did he victimize her as well? Nothing but questions we'll probably never know the answer to.

Honorable Mention: Azan is a good and admirable man, but more like a peer to Guts than a mentor despite their difference in age and Azan's wisdom. Just not the right time and place for these two to have that sort of relationship.

Bonus: Grunbeld - Why's he on here at all besides a superficial resemblance resulting in lazy theory? Well, because he's a cautionary example, the "do as I say, not as I do" lecturer with nothing more to offer. A lame wannabe stepdad Guts should mouth off to and rebel against, and he did! You suck, Grundad! :guts:

17
Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: November 07, 2017, 04:32:22 PM »
Super Mario Galaxy - I've actually owned this one for a while, but never had the inclination to dive in for some reason; that changed yesterday when I ripped open a packed moving box (I'm moving, this was dumb) because I just had the urge to Mario and since I can't go on the Odyssey yet it was high time I explored the Galaxy... and so far it's pretty good! I beat the first Galaxy and everything was pretty cool and even a little trippy with the shifting gravity and perspectives. It feels both extremely simplified, like core Mario 64 gameplay, but with all sorts of unique wrinkles on top. It's actually a stimulating challenge too (though I'm not sure if that's on account of the game design itself or the Wii controls =). Anyway, looking forward to more as so far it lives up to its reputation. I've played other entries by the same team, and particularly loved Mario 3D Land, but 3D World didn't have the same effect on me and I'm hoping Galaxy will.

18
Speculation Nation / Re: Guts's Lineage
« on: November 07, 2017, 05:05:18 AM »
Well, so far it's unanimous. :guts:

Yeah, humble origins are the way to go with the big guy; he's extraordinary by his own means, not any sort of lineage or predestiny, which perfectly fits his character, makeup and the story's broader themes as they relate to him, as just about everyone has pointed out. So, Miura shouldn't fuck him up like some Jon Snow... on the other hand, he is a Star Wars fan, so maybe he won't be able to resist the pull of "legitimizing" Guts with some kind if impressive background that explains his physical prowess if nothing else. He doesn't have to be Skully's and Flora's secret lovechild (actually Griff makes more sense for Gaiseric blood) to simply have a biological father or mother that were more than average, but if I had to guess I'd assume they'll remain anonymous; for better or worse Shisu and Gambino are Guts' parents.

Or he's an EFL! :puck: :troll:

20
Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Movies you've recently watched
« on: October 27, 2017, 07:24:14 PM »
Part of me wants it to be a film for esoteric nerd reasons, but a series would more easily fit the mold.

Well, there's something to be said for a truly transcendent film, but the problem is the likelihood of that is so small, particularly because it's rarely even attempted over making it more commercial. Blade Runner 2049 is a great example; they really tried in earnest to do it "the right way," and largely pulled it off, but were not rewarded.

That being said, I can count on one hand the number of serialized dramas that have left an impression on me, particularly recently. I feel like these studios have become pros at pushing out lots of content, creating a container with a substantial pitch, pilot and conclusion, and then just filling the rest of the glass with piss. Netflix is in particularly guilty of this, stringing out their series' structure with filler, dragging B-plots on for 5 episodes and then resolving them suddenly in minutes. Ugh... Hey speaking of which guys, Stranger Things 2 is out!

Fair point, I'm also looking at the exceptions, The Sopranos, GoT, etc rather than the rule, which is that most TV is still bad or disappointing, even if there's infinitely more attempts at worthwhile content (or the meaning of that isn't the same as "good" these days). Still, I feel like there's a way better chance and it would be easier to do it justice as a big budget prestige TV project than finding the patience and lightning in a bottle to do a worthwhile film, let alone film series. One advantage Dune would have on TV is they already have plenty of material and another longform media platform would give them the best chance to just make a yeoman's work filming it and let the source do the talking and shine through, so they shouldn't need to resort to the piss jar as you say. Doesn't mean they wouldn't, of course! :carcus: Anyway, I guess they're already doing it as a movie so this is academic at this point, and I agree with the sentiment that Villeneuve giving it a shot is about as promising as anything I can think of, even if it still seems doomed to fall short.

Nope! I'll look for that one. I have a road trip this weekend.

I check in on the show every 6 months or so. Sometimes that show is amazing. But it's absolutely contingent on the guest being solid and receptive to Maron's conversational style. Much of the time, it's just boring to me, or feels like they're running down the clock as much as they can. I have the same problem with WTF as I do with the Jimmy Pardo podcast -- both can  be phenomenal, but it's too much inside baseball. Whether it's comedy or Hollywood, the way they talk about those industries lifts the curtain in a way that's just really off-putting to me.

Cool, but yeah, it has to be a guest I'm into or it's just listening to Maron talk to himself, which if you've heard once is probably enough. The only pods I can stand to listen to semi-regularly are The Bill Simmons podcast, WTF, and... that's about it. I try listening to the Deadcast sometimes but they're awful, and used to listen to Carolla back in the day but again it was the same thing all the time, and Keepin' It 1600/Pod Save America was promptly discarded on November 9th. :ganishka:

21
Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Movies you've recently watched
« on: October 27, 2017, 02:29:43 PM »
I don't think there should be any concerns for that. Lynch's Dune has never been regarded as the authoritative take on the book, so it wouldn't make much sense for Villeneuve to attempt to mimick it.



Instead, I imagine (hope?) that Villeneuve will attempt to offer his interpretation of the novel. This both excites me and makes me uncomfortable. The novel is epic science fiction, and has long deserved a more dignified seat at the table among sci-fi films ó if anything, just to get more people to read the damned book and realize how awesome it is. The problem is, I don't think Dune is something you can comfortably squeeze into a feature-length film. Even ignoring the vast amount of set up time necessary to digest the arrangement of houses, economy, technology, history that makes the scale of the opening act carry weight, there's a lot of character development, passages of time, that don't lend themselves to a single breezy sit-down experience, even at 2h 44 min. And if the solution is to trim those aforementioned parts, then like Studio4C cutting out the inconvenient Bonfire of Dreams sequence, I'd rather the attempt just not be made. But I'm getting ahead of myself  :void:

Yeah, it's the same problem with a lot of huge book to film adaptations: it needs the Harry Potter multi-film slow roll treatment to even have a chance of being done right (Dark Tower being the latest grand failure), but few things have the juice, or the irrational commitment from masses of fans that the films don't actually need to be objectively good or even very entertaining (hi again, Harry!), for that huge commitment upfront, and I don't think Dune is one of them despite being perhaps the most renowned sci-fi novel of all time (my first generation nerd dad is still so proud of his first edition :carcus:). On the other hand, I don't even think a film series is the best choice for something like this for the reasons you laid out, and a TV series is obviously no longer the death sentence by low expectations it once was, but rather often finer drama than anything at the movies these days (like I said, as good as 2049 was, it can't help but feel shallow compared to, say, Westworld). Calling HBO? Netflix? Amazon (which we heard wants it's own GoT)? You guys have any billions left to bring Dune to life, even as a write off? It'll be better received now than the Confederate fanfic written by male Hollywood power players, I promise! =)

It's funny that you bring that up, because a significant chunk of the creative energies behind Jodorowsky's ill-fated Dune were eventually what gave birth to Alien.

Oh yeah, that mini-golden age was so incestuous! I heard Walter Hill talk about it a bit on the WTF pod, I don't know if you heard it (I know you've been a listener in the past) but it's worth it for that alone.

22
Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: October 27, 2017, 02:17:22 PM »
Sucked into Super Mario Odyssey, everyone. The game is wonderful.

Thanks to the Wii U version of BotW I was never really under pressure to make a decision on Switch, but now... this feeling...


23
I acknowledge this will make me sound like an old man, but is Rick & Morty from the same mind as House of Cosbys?

Yup! But not old, just astute. As a matter of fact, Rick & Morty's Internet precursor, a takeoff on Back to the Future's Doc and Marty, is a direct result of the legal trouble House of Cosby's faced and basically a big fuck you to Universal in the form of a cartoon about Doc Brown finding different pretexts to get Marty McFly to lick his balls. :ganishka:

24
Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Movies you've recently watched
« on: October 26, 2017, 10:26:41 PM »
Can't be bothered to read all those posts (please forgive me)

You could at least pretend :judo: ... like me. :griffnotevil:

here's my take on Blade Runner 2049: I thought the movie was good enough. There's some nice photography in there, although the shots are way too clean. They lack the grit of the original, they often feel sterile and some scenes really look CGI'd (specifically at the beginning when we see the car in the rain). But it is a visually pleasing movie.

Yeah, for the world being worse off everything seemed somehow more clean and uniform (and some of those exterior landscape shots were indeed looking like fog in a video game, but I think the change(s) in style befit the changes in the times and the director. It's its own style of Blade Runner, yet somehow nothing can top those practical and composite effects from fucking 1982. I mean, it looks more real because it was more real. It was Replicant versus Joi technology; we didn't know any better than to actually build it. =)

The music also did a decent enough job evoking Vangelis, if somewhat crudely.

*BRRAAAAAANG* I didn't know I signed up for the vibrating X-D experience, but it apparently came free.

The story's not too bad, although it's got its share of inconsistencies. But it's not stupid and it tries to have meaning. In that regard the movie could have been much much worse.

I didn't realize until I saw his name that Hampton Fancher had come back, which helps explain how it's such a comfortably elegant offshoot of the original rather than a ripoff or totally out there re-imagining like these things usually go when a "fan of the original" gets hold of it. Feels like an authentic sequel and organic follow-up, albeit clearly of a different cinematic age and ilk. It basically feels like a next generation sequel to a classic game.

That being said, the Joi subplot really overstays its welcome and feels like it wanted to be its own movie but was grafted onto this one instead. I appreciated that for all its artificiality, the story played her character straight (she appears to have her own will all along), that lends it more depth than it ought to have. But still, I think those themes were better addressed in Star Trek Voyager.

:ganishka:

What hasn't Star Trek done better (and worse =)? But yeah, I couldn't really get with Joi in the moment, though it added another layer most films (including this one according to the box office=) cannot afford. And the final inference that it was all bullshit, in contrast to the "more human than human" Replicants, was satisfying to me since that was pretty much my visceral reaction. I look forward to the day when I have to apologize for this and all my virtualphobia on twitter before my cyber identity is formally executed and I have to live in exile with the troglodytes, a fate worse than death.

Harrison Ford basically plays himself and not Deckard (like he does in all movies these days), which is unfortunate.

He was a feisty Ford, but no not very much like "cold fish" Deckard. I don't really see how living in exile for decades would unlock his passions either, but maybe he went stir crazy. Again, it probably didn't help they didn't even try a costume or hair and makeup or anything. Harrison Ford looks the same in all his interviews as his movies nowadays. Try a little theater magic, guys, just put the old costume on him and see what happens. BTW, I also wasn't sold on the romanticizing of his relationship with Rachael. It wasn't some great ideal love, far from it, and it was desperate and ultimately about survival for them both and that's what I liked about it. It was like that thread in 2049 followed the studio's theatrical ending instead.

The limitations of Ryan Gosling's acting are also visible despite his character being emotionless on purpose, which says a lot.

He was a bit of a noble cipher for us and the Relipcants as a group I felt.

I did like Leto's portrayal of Wallace, though the drones felt totally unnecessary and seem like some that will age terribly. I think Luv was well-acted too.

These two had the most interesting performances but the least to do and we don't really get to the bottom of them! Leto is just mysteriously evil and Luv seems to have a lot going on under the surface but we don't really get at it besides her misused Replicant pride. Also I didn't think those drones looked good NOW; it was like the scarabs from Brendan Fraser's The Mummy or something.

Anyway, did this movie need to exist? No. But I'm Ok with it existing.

This is basically the softer interpretation I've come around to from my initial disappointments. The movie does some good or even great things and ultimately does no harm so I'm happier that we have it than don't. It's about as sincere, faithful and worthy an effort at a follow up like this that could be attempted at this point... so of course Ridley Scott had relatively little to do with it. :ganishka: Even it's box office shortcomings give it a badge of honor in my eyes; they went for the real ponderous sci-fi shit and oaid the price rather than make some nightmare Michael Bay version of Blade Runner (like Scott did with Alien, ironically).

I'm also fine with Villeneuve trying his hand at Dune (my favorite novel).

As long as he doesn't have the same reverence for David Lynch's version that he clearly does for Blade Runner. :ganishka:

What if Ridley Scott had done Dune back in his prime and we ended up with an impeccable sci-fi trilogy of Alien, Dune, and Blade Runner... Of course, we might not have got Blade Runner then, at least not the same one, and no guarantees anybody, even 79-82 Scott, can pull off Dune (and some would argue Lynch didn't do half bad for a supposedly "unfilmmable" work).

25
Throwing tantrums at McDonald's over a dipping sauce.

Yeah, I saw that, but that's just stupid and obnoxious. Worse would be the bitching about/attacking the shows women writers, but I'm still failing to see the distinction between them and... The Internet? Anyway, I'm not defending them or saying they aren't terrible (I can definitely see how a bunch of Rick wannabes could be a problem), but it's just that I only ever hear the secondhand backlash which makes my natural skepticism kick in so it seems more like a Rick & Morty meme than them actually being exceptionally worse than all the other obnoxious or toxic fanbases online.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 385