Jump to content

NNY

Members
  • Posts

    274
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by NNY

  1. Foster's Home for Imaginary friends was kind of a mixed bag if you ask me, it had some genuinely funny ideas as well as some bland ones as well... Well really most of the episodes were funny it's just a lot of them did not hold up well to replays. Overall though I'd definitely place it higher than the new shows like Chowder and Flapjack, and most of the time I'd continue to tune in if I heard that familiar kazoo in the intro.

    Chowder and Flapjack are the best new CN shows to come out in five years or so.

  2. Funny, because you've got it bass ackwards. The show was hardly funny, completely unoriginal, didn't utilize the source material half as well as it should have, and horribly repetitive. Compared to Samurai Jack, Triple E, Dexter's Lab, or even the PPGs, Foster's is garbage.

    Of course, there's no accounting for personal taste, so whatever...

    Neko, you can't read. Hang your head in shame.

    Foster's was witty and charming. It never felt repetitive, the entire concept was one hundred percent original, Foster's wasn't an adaptation, so it had no source material. What the hell are you blabbering on about?

  3. Horrible movie. Bad acting, looks like a bad acid trip. Bastardization of the show.

    Excellent movie, purposefully bad acting, masturbation for your eyes.

    Don't go in Speed Racer expecting Gone With The Wind. It's fun, fast paced, hilarious, and feels like your eyeballs just ejaculated. Next to Dark Knight, Speed Racer was my favorite movie this summer. Don't listen to the the critics on this one, Speed Racer is sure to become a cult classic. But if you missed it at the theatres, you really missed out on one of the best movie going experiences this decade.

  4. my argument is flawed you say? no offense, and i'm sure you will pull out your dictionary for more "terms", but you can't even argue having not seen the film. i mean how can you? first of all can you prove i plagiarized? no. you haven't seen it. you know nothing about my film other than the 67 seconds i uploaded. second, what did anything in the trailer even have to do with The Dark Knight? anything? or just how i "looked"? have you seen The Dark Knight? if i had not used music from The Dark Knight in that trailer would you think all this still? are you aware that i know i used music from The Dark Knight in that trailer? i actually thought it was funny. third, i had 4 "professors" who have real film experience helping us in many of the scenes. did you read my first post? they have seen both trailers and the cut film. they didn't say anything you said. funny huh? fourth, what is it you want? me to admit i ripped off The Dark Knight? or joker? or what? do you have to always be right? is it something like that? cause if that will make you shut up i'll do it. and anyone out there who believes me, which is all but you and a few others here, thank you. i don't know what you want me to say. but since you know everything you can just put words in my mouth. sound good?

    Ha ha ha. "Professors." You know, Charles Foster Kane married a "singer."

  5. it's twisted metal. of course it's not original. i don't deserve credit for coming up with it. and i don't recall blaming anyone.... and what would i blame them for?

    No, no, no. Your argument is flawed. There is a difference between "not original" and "plagiarism."

    Webster's Dictionary defines originality as

    Originality

    the quality or state of being original 2 : freshness of aspect' date=' design, or style 3 : the power of independent thought or constructive imagination.[/quote']

    None of this describes your movie.

    Plagiarized

    to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source intransitive verb : to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source

    See what I did here? I gave credit to my sources! And my sources prove my point here.

    You didn't make a Twisted Metal movie. You're making The Dark Knight' date=' albeit, poorly, and slapping the title "TWISTED METAL" on it.

    Please, go to a nearby community college, find a professor who teaches Contemporary Cinema. Show him/her your trailer. Show them your movie. They'll say the same thing back to you. [i']It's too easy to make yourself the laughing stock of the internet. Go do it the public eye!

    All the world's a stage,

    And all the men and women merely players:

    They have their exits and their entrances;

    So come and do it! MAKE YOUR ENTRANCE! We're waiting. Prove us wrong.

  6. Why so serious, POCKETMAN!?

    Plagiarists will be the last to admit their lack of any original work. Bad artists don't listen to constructive criticism. A stubborn person blames everyone else for his/her failings and won't try to improve his/herself. POCKETMAN, you've demonstrated all of these actions. Your lack of any quality in any aspect of your life leaks into the grammar and punctuation in your posts. I'd say this is unintentional, but a cry for help is much more believable when it's written with crayon and backwards "R"s.

    I knew about the older one, but I doubted it rose to the same level of violence as the new one.

    This could only be said if you've never actually seen Death Race 2000 (1975). Violence isn't as creative and cynical today as it was in the bleak 70s.

  7. You have to understand that it was the first Batman movie since the campiest movie ever in the first Batman movie. And the idea of a more pathos-driven Batman was starting to take off in the 80's and clearly Tim Burton looked to capitalize on that. I mean, whenever you see Bruce in that movie, it was like a study in the character's self pity and feeling of pity for the city. That was basically what the two Batman movies made by Burton was about. The guy knows how to put in that ironic touch beyond the campiness. If you get hung about the campiness, then that's that. Even the music in that movie was sorta campy but it still ended up rising above the occasion throughout.

    Also, you say "Batman killed" but I have to laugh at the notion. It was more like the bad guys getting into it and getting themselves in the situation to be killed. Batman didn't go out there with the idea of killing them (maybe the remote controlled Batmobile bombing aside, but the baddies camped there, Batman flushed it out. Done and done). To me, that kind of Batman makes more sense than some ultra pacifist that seems to only work in the comicbook pages where Batman is infinitely more menacing than any real life Batman adaptation can be.

    Batman bombing that building down knowing there were people in there or not is still plain stupid.

    He also kicks a guy down the staircase right before fighting Joker. That's was about a twenty story drop. Didn't even bother to try to save that guy.

    And there was a scene in Returns where he straps a bomb to someone, throws him down, and the guy blows up.

    Burton's Batman doesn't have a no-kill-code. Once in a while he'll try to save someone, but he's got no problem with killing some shmuck. He never says anything about not killing anybody in both films.

  8. People in costumes is one of the many reasons I no longer see movies in the theater.

    EDIT: and it was a VERY good movie. Not #1 of all time as IMDB fanwankers would have you believe (_12 Monkeys_ still being my solid favorite), but it was easily the best of the Batman franchise. People in this thread who claim the other movies stick closer to the "older" comics while this one is more like "new" ones apparently don't realize Frank Miller's storylines are almost as old as me.

    -steve

    That's because Miller's comics are relatively newer compared to Bob Kane's.

  9. The movie was awesome.

    But I was distracted throughout once I saw the trailer for the watchmen.

    I had a fangasm as soon as I realized what the trailer was.

    I had the same thing happen to me. The first time I saw Dark Knight was at an advanced screening, so the only trailers we got were for Terminator Salvation and some forgettable Matt Damon movie. The second time we saw it was in IMAX opening night. We got the Watchmen trailer, and my friend and I were just so satisfied, it wouldn't have mattered if we saw The Dark Knight again or not.

    I didn't. Actually the part about Joker's dad was a half truth, much like a lot of the stuff Ledger's Joker talked about. I guess that works as irony in itself and I think it's good.

    Joker tailored each story to his audience. If he was telling it to an old man, he said it was his dad. If it was a pretty woman, he'd say it was his wife. I'm sure if he say a little boy, he'd say he got in an accident with this son. None of them are true. If Joker has a past, he'd prefer it to be multiple choice.

  10. The Tales of the Black Freighter subplot won't be in the movie. However, it is coming out as a separate animated movie, being released directly to DVD a week after Watchmen comes out. Zack Snyder himself is doing the voice of the captain.

  11. And what the hell did they do with Oz and Comedian's hairstyles? Oz in particular looks like a goof. Also seems like they de-aged Comedian a good deal based on his youthful look in Vietnam. I'm not nitpicking like the movie will be poor, but would rather not have a visual setting like the permanent dusk of 300.

    Well, this is the first image of Comedian they released.

    comediand72.jpg

    Hell, I thought that was cooler than Rorschach.

×
×
  • Create New...