RugbyRebels

cashead wrote:

Banquo wrote:

cashead wrote:
Well...



this is awkward....

zooms over my head!

The two guys in the first photo are Dan O’Bannon and Ronald Shusett, who wrote the original script. O’Bannon did the majority of the writing, while Shusett’s major contribution was coming up with a way to get the creature on the Nostromo (“What if it screwed one of them?”). While O’Bannon had written the character who would become Ripley as a man, he added a note under the character list (which was also lacking any first names), that all characters in the film are unisex, which led to Ridley Scott agreeing to looking for an actress to fill the lead role.

The second photo is Walter Hill and David Giler, who are 2/3 of the producers that make up Brandywine Productions (the other is Gordon Carroll, who passed away in 2005). They rewrote the script over 8 drafts, renamed all the characters and introduced the Ash subplot.

Cool

Yeah. Why did I just read all that? What did that have to do with KK’s ramblings anyway?

Mikey Brown wrote:Yeah. Why did I just read all that? What did that have to do with KK’s ramblings anyway?

Because he was wrong, corrected himself, and was still wrong.

cashead wrote:The two guys in the first photo are Dan O’Bannon and Ronald Shusett, who wrote the original script. O’Bannon did the majority of the writing, while Shusett’s major contribution was coming up with a way to get the creature on the Nostromo (“What if it screwed one of them?”). While O’Bannon had written the character who would become Ripley as a man, he added a note under the character list (which was also lacking any first names), that all characters in the film are unisex, which led to Ridley Scott agreeing to looking for an actress to fill the lead role.

The second photo is Walter Hill and David Giler, who are 2/3 of the producers that make up Brandywine Productions (the other is Gordon Carroll, who passed away in 2005). They rewrote the script over 8 drafts, renamed all the characters and introduced the Ash subplot.

I mean - how did we not all get that from 2 pictures

Which Tyler wrote:

cashead wrote:The two guys in the first photo are Dan O’Bannon and Ronald Shusett, who wrote the original script. O’Bannon did the majority of the writing, while Shusett’s major contribution was coming up with a way to get the creature on the Nostromo (“What if it screwed one of them?”). While O’Bannon had written the character who would become Ripley as a man, he added a note under the character list (which was also lacking any first names), that all characters in the film are unisex, which led to Ridley Scott agreeing to looking for an actress to fill the lead role.

The second photo is Walter Hill and David Giler, who are 2/3 of the producers that make up Brandywine Productions (the other is Gordon Carroll, who passed away in 2005). They rewrote the script over 8 drafts, renamed all the characters and introduced the Ash subplot.

I mean - how did we not all get that from 2 pictures

I figured someone would recognise the faces. I obviously overestimated you lot.

cashead wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

cashead wrote:The two guys in the first photo are Dan O’Bannon and Ronald Shusett, who wrote the original script. O’Bannon did the majority of the writing, while Shusett’s major contribution was coming up with a way to get the creature on the Nostromo (“What if it screwed one of them?”). While O’Bannon had written the character who would become Ripley as a man, he added a note under the character list (which was also lacking any first names), that all characters in the film are unisex, which led to Ridley Scott agreeing to looking for an actress to fill the lead role.

The second photo is Walter Hill and David Giler, who are 2/3 of the producers that make up Brandywine Productions (the other is Gordon Carroll, who passed away in 2005). They rewrote the script over 8 drafts, renamed all the characters and introduced the Ash subplot.

I mean - how did we not all get that from 2 pictures

I figured someone would recognise the faces. I obviously overestimated you lot.

Hapless, us

cashead wrote: I figured someone would recognise the faces. I obviously overestimated you lot.

You're talking about a bunch of people who'd mostly never heard of Harvey Weinstein 12 months ago, let alone be able to recognise him.
As mentioned, I struggle to recognise some A-list actors, O doubt I'd recognise more than a couple of directors, and no hope whatsoever of recognising any producer or screenwriter

cashead wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Yeah. Why did I just read all that? What did that have to do with KK’s ramblings anyway?

Because he was wrong, corrected himself, and was still wrong.

I was wrong,....but I did see one of them make the association.

'The Death of Stalin'... I've watched it twice and it just keeps getting better.
It's the most quotable comedy movie since The Producers.

'I miss the Tsar'......Michael Palin taking a slash in the flowerbeds.
'Yeah, off you go, Flower' Paul Whitehouse to Geoffrey Tambor.

Some knowledge of Russian history is useful but not entirely necessary.

kk67 wrote:'The Death of Stalin'... I've watched it twice and it just keeps getting better.
It's the most quotable comedy movie since The Producers.

'I miss the Tsar'......Michael Palin taking a slash in the flowerbeds.
'Yeah, off you go, Flower' Paul Whitehouse to Geoffrey Tambor.

Some knowledge of Russian history is useful but not entirely necessary.

Is this the Armando Ianucci thing?

Yeah. The ensemble cast is brilliant. Paul Whitehouse, Tambor, Palin ,Winstone, Isaacs, Buscemi......
I'm amazed Stephen Fry and Rowan Atkinson didn't make a cameo appearance. You should watch this movie.

Friend of mine directed this:

Death of stalin - brilliant
I, tonya, good show, worth a look
Phantom thread - very good, is pretty much what you'd expect

paddy no 11 wrote:Death of stalin - brilliant
I, tonya, good show, worth a look
Phantom thread - very good, is pretty much what you'd expect

I, Tonya was some of the best acting I can remember seeing. Feckin grim plot, but very watchable for all that.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

Annihilation. Proper crap. If you think you haven’t seen t, well, you have.

Amadeus.
In honour of Milos Forman I bought the DVD this afternoon. Fecking superb film, Peter Shaffer is the writer.

I might have a fault with my new JBL soundbar. It cuts out the background noise ?. It cuts out totally at silence ??.

Got around to seeing Black Panther.

It's 'aight.

Brimstone.
Guy Pearce is a fantastic actor. Him and Mark Rylance are two of the finest actors I've ever seen but this is not a movie I will watch again. I'd usually be happy to watch a decent Western more than once..... even a half decent Western and I'll watch it a few times. But this is super ugly.

On a lighter note... C5 had 'Dances with Wolves' as their Sunday family fare.
Strangely, someone at C5 decided not to include the subtitles in the broadcast. Which meant that the lengthy polemics dealing with why: 'we can't trust Whitey' were totally lost.
It was such a bizarre moment that I actually started to question whether the original movie had subtitles. When I realized I was translating the Sioux language, I knew it was a f*ck up.

Avengers: Infinity War.

Saw this the other day with my 12 year old son. He loved it, but I thought it was a massive pile of wank.

Too much happening, too many characters (which may have been the point, but it was just overly pointless).

My son is into the Marvel universe thing, but my experience is limited to a few movies, without the need for much of the back story.

I liked Deadpool, Ant-Man and Gruaniads of the Galaxy, but can live without the others I've seen.

This is going to drag on for many a year, before people start to figure out that the plot lines and characters are pretty much interchangeable and divert their attentions to whatever else.

Ready Player One on the other hand...

...Loved it!

CGI rich, soppy storyline, loser overcomes adversity, loser overcomes the odds to win the 'game', kids Vs adults, good Vs evil, corporations...blah blah blah, but I thought it was a more than decent flick.

Haven't read the book, didn't know one existed, so just judged the movie on what I saw, and I enjoyed it and the nostalgic references.

I was really looking forward to this film after the hype from the trailers, and part of me thought the film would be crap, but I liked it.

Give me this over x amount of 'superheroes' fighting evil and threats against the Earth, any day!

WaspInWales wrote:Avengers: Infinity War.

Saw this the other day with my 12 year old son. He loved it, but I thought it was a massive pile of wank.

Too much happening, too many characters (which may have been the point, but it was just overly pointless).

My son is into the Marvel universe thing, but my experience is limited to a few movies, without the need for much of the back story.

I liked Deadpool, Ant-Man and Gruaniads of the Galaxy, but can live without the others I've seen.

This is going to drag on for many a year, before people start to figure out that the plot lines and characters are pretty much interchangeable and divert their attentions to whatever else.

Infinity War works better when you view it as a film about Thanos, his motivations (bring balance to the universe by culling 50% of the population, for the greater good) and his personality - he's not truly evil, he believes he is being altruistic, and there even is some good in him but at the same time, he's absolutely committed to his goals as well, no matter the cost. The Russo Brothers who directed it have said as much, and his narrative arc in the film even follows that sort of structure.

Out of the three Avengers films, it's the only one I enjoyed, but it does have the common issue that always besets comic book cross-over events or ensemble pictures - the huge cast of characters is difficult to wield effectively.

In terms of the rest of the MCU films, it's really a case of what you're into since a fair few of them feel like other genre films, which happen to feature Marvel characters: Ant-Man is basically a heist film, the last couple of Captain America films are very much espionage films, Thor: Ragnarok is a buddy film, and so on.

For some reason I flicked through batman vs superman. I thought it would be a pile of garbage but funny. It wasn’t that funny though.

Confirmed to me that, as I suspected, every single one of these superhero films are totally shite.

I enjoyed infinity war but do agree there's too many characters that I'm not interested in. I dont really care about Black panther, vision, visions burd, the budget iron men and probably another couple. If you're not into marvel I can see why you wouldn't enjoy it.

cashead wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Avengers: Infinity War.

Saw this the other day with my 12 year old son. He loved it, but I thought it was a massive pile of wank.

Too much happening, too many characters (which may have been the point, but it was just overly pointless).

My son is into the Marvel universe thing, but my experience is limited to a few movies, without the need for much of the back story.

I liked Deadpool, Ant-Man and Gruaniads of the Galaxy, but can live without the others I've seen.

This is going to drag on for many a year, before people start to figure out that the plot lines and characters are pretty much interchangeable and divert their attentions to whatever else.

Infinity War works better when you view it as a film about Thanos, his motivations (bring balance to the universe by culling 50% of the population, for the greater good) and his personality - he's not truly evil, he believes he is being altruistic, and there even is some good in him but at the same time, he's absolutely committed to his goals as well, no matter the cost. The Russo Brothers who directed it have said as much, and his narrative arc in the film even follows that sort of structure.

Out of the three Avengers films, it's the only one I enjoyed, but it does have the common issue that always besets comic book cross-over events or ensemble pictures - the huge cast of characters is difficult to wield effectively.

In terms of the rest of the MCU films, it's really a case of what you're into since a fair few of them feel like other genre films, which happen to feature Marvel characters: Ant-Man is basically a heist film, the last couple of Captain America films are very much espionage films, Thor: Ragnarok is a buddy film, and so on.

I agree that Thanos was the strongest/most interesting character in the movie. Says a lot when multi-million/billion dollar superheroes are up against him, but at the same time it just paves the way for the follow up when it's revealed all the culled population have just been sent to a parallel universe and can be saved by the remaining Avengers with a little help from someone close to Thanos. Rinse and repeat.

No doubt all the Marvel films fall into generic categories such as heist, espionage and buddy flicks but they're all about good vs evil, overcoming adversity, against the odds, etc, etc...

I've never been into comics so my default setting may be stopping me from appreciating these films for how others perceive them. That said, I grew up on Superman and Star Wars movies and I've definitely appreciated them, no matter how corny they have been.

WaspInWales wrote:

cashead wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Avengers: Infinity War.

Saw this the other day with my 12 year old son. He loved it, but I thought it was a massive pile of wank.

Too much happening, too many characters (which may have been the point, but it was just overly pointless).

My son is into the Marvel universe thing, but my experience is limited to a few movies, without the need for much of the back story.

I liked Deadpool, Ant-Man and Gruaniads of the Galaxy, but can live without the others I've seen.

This is going to drag on for many a year, before people start to figure out that the plot lines and characters are pretty much interchangeable and divert their attentions to whatever else.

Infinity War works better when you view it as a film about Thanos, his motivations (bring balance to the universe by culling 50% of the population, for the greater good) and his personality - he's not truly evil, he believes he is being altruistic, and there even is some good in him but at the same time, he's absolutely committed to his goals as well, no matter the cost. The Russo Brothers who directed it have said as much, and his narrative arc in the film even follows that sort of structure.

Out of the three Avengers films, it's the only one I enjoyed, but it does have the common issue that always besets comic book cross-over events or ensemble pictures - the huge cast of characters is difficult to wield effectively.

In terms of the rest of the MCU films, it's really a case of what you're into since a fair few of them feel like other genre films, which happen to feature Marvel characters: Ant-Man is basically a heist film, the last couple of Captain America films are very much espionage films, Thor: Ragnarok is a buddy film, and so on.

I agree that Thanos was the strongest/most interesting character in the movie. Says a lot when multi-million/billion dollar superheroes are up against him, but at the same time it just paves the way for the follow up when it's revealed all the culled population have just been sent to a parallel universe and can be saved by the remaining Avengers with a little help from someone close to Thanos. Rinse and repeat.

No doubt all the Marvel films fall into generic categories such as heist, espionage and buddy flicks but they're all about good vs evil, overcoming adversity, against the odds, etc, etc...

I've never been into comics so my default setting may be stopping me from appreciating these films for how others perceive them. That said, I grew up on Superman and Star Wars movies and I've definitely appreciated them, no matter how corny they have been.

It's one of the reasons why the Marvel films are actually doing so well, and why Logan was so well-regarded last year. They clearly took the lesson of The Dark Knight 10 years ago, where Chris Nolan and co. made a crime epic which just so happened to be about a guy with abandonment issues dressing up as a flying rodent fighting a psychotic clown, rather than a "superhero film." Logan wasn't so much a superhero film, as it was a Western roadmovie about an old gunslinger gearing up for one last showdown to protect a convoy (getting X23 to North Dakota, and then helping the mutant kids across the border, at the cost of his own life). It's why despite the frequent bold proclamations of "this, surely will be the end of the superhero movie trend!" (by the way, if the "trend" has been going on for 20+ years, it's not a trend), the Marvel films will keep doing incredibly well - because there's variety there, and because it can cater to so many tastes. And if you want something that is super-gritty, grimdark, you can always go for Daredevil and Punisher on Netflix.
It's also clearly what Fox are now doing with the X-Men films, with spin-offs, starting with Logan - genre films which just so happen to feature X-Men.