FUCK.
http://www.tmz.com/2012/10/30/disney-lucasfilm-purchase-4-billion-new-star-wars-movie-episode-7/ (http://www.tmz.com/2012/10/30/disney-lucasfilm-purchase-4-billion-new-star-wars-movie-episode-7/)
Because I don't trust TMZ
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/10/30/disney-lucasfilm.html
That was unexpected.
Quote from: Barrister on October 30, 2012, 03:50:57 PM
Because I don't trust TMZ
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/10/30/disney-lucasfilm.html
That was unexpected.
Because I don't trust TMZ or CBC
http://languish.org/forums/index.php/topic,8670.msg496376.html#new
Rough.
Wow, that's pretty big. So I guess Lucas is retiring now?
This can only be a good thing. New Star Wars movies were always an inevitability; but this way, we didn't have to morbidly wait for George Lucas to die before someone else could do anything with the property.
Obviously I made my thread title too subtle :P
Obviously. :rolleyes:
At least they're not making God-damned prequels.
In the right hands it could be interesting to see what future stories there might be in the Star Wars universe...
Judging by comics and novels, and the Clone Wars series, there's good stuff and plenty of bad stuff, so someone new coming in could do good, or they could mess it up.
That's why I like the Old Republic setting - it's kind of a re-imagining of the universe, without much of the canon baggage.
Quote from: Valmy on October 30, 2012, 04:05:02 PM
Obviously I made my thread title too subtle :P
Yes :D
His ideas written by someone that knows how to write a screenplay is good. See Empire Strikes Back.
I'm looking forward to Snow White and the Seven Ewoks. :cool:
Quote from: Caliga on October 30, 2012, 04:30:12 PM
I'm looking forward to Snow White and the Seven Ewoks. :cool:
. . . the XXX parody.
could be good, could be bad. For the moment, I'll take it as good news.
Holy shit 4 billion dollars. :o :lol:
Star Wars 2 : The Search for More Money
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 30, 2012, 05:03:48 PM
Holy shit 4 billion dollars. :o :lol:
ILM and Skywalker Sound come as part of the deal. What's the status of Lucasarts these days?
Could we see a Star Wars Battlefront III game?! :cool:
Episode VII, huh? Will Carrie Fisher be reprising her role as a sex symbol?
Quote from: Kleves on October 30, 2012, 05:50:02 PM
Episode VII, huh? Will Carrie Fisher be reprising her role as a sex symbol?
That gives me boner.
This could actually be interesting... If Lucas goes away, do we get a brilliant restoration of the original trilogy, Disney-style, as part of the sequel launch in 2015?
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 30, 2012, 05:51:20 PM
Quote from: Kleves on October 30, 2012, 05:50:02 PM
Episode VII, huh? Will Carrie Fisher be reprising her role as a sex symbol?
That gives me boner.
Deviant.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Fcontent%2Fdam%2Fslate%2Fblogs%2Fbrowbeat%2F2012%2F10%2F30%2Fdisney_acquires_lucasfilm_plans_star_wars_episode_vii_what_should_we_expect%2F103394894.jpg.CROP.article568-large.jpg&hash=960340703b1ab6288bf45bceb80ba628ab63ca09)
Note how Lucas and R2-D2 manifest unmodified as Disney Characters.
Quote from: merithyn on October 30, 2012, 03:57:02 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 30, 2012, 03:50:57 PM
Because I don't trust TMZ
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/10/30/disney-lucasfilm.html
That was unexpected.
Because I don't trust TMZ or CBC
http://languish.org/forums/index.php/topic,8670.msg496376.html#new
Best reply ever. :lol:
I can just imagine the plot...
Lando Calrissian: Han, then I blew up the death star. It was epic. You ever blow up a death star?
Han Solo: No, I never blew up a death star. You ever do a princess?
Lando: Touché. But, what are we going to do now?
Han: Not sure, but I expect three movies of interminable council meetings, sub-par villains, failed comic relief and whining jedi's in training.
Lando: Yeah, don't know how you are going to top Darth Vader as a villain and the Death Star as a deadly threat.
Han: We can give Darth Vader a second light saber?
Lando: Darth Maul
Han: We can do the Death Star again?
Lando: we've already done that bit twice now.
Han: Sooo... more proto-incest?
Lando: Hott.
Han: So who's it gonna be?
Lando: Your kids.
Han: WTF?
Lando: Nobody else is having sex in this galaxy.
Han: Can't we just make Indiana Jones?
Lando: You do know Shia Lebouf is playing you.
Han: Times like this make me wish that Greedo had not only shot first but also hit at point blank range.
Quote from: FunkMonk on October 30, 2012, 05:03:48 PM
Holy shit 4 billion dollars. :o :lol:
Star Wars 2 : The Search for More Money
$4 Billion seems kinda cheap. I'd've gone $5 billion, easy.
How did this pass anti-trust muster? Disney owning the Star Wars and Indiana Jones franchises turns it into an even bigger powerhouse than it was before.
Just realized the silver lining: now Howard the Duck is Disney's problem. :lol:
Lea Thompson was hot in that.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on October 30, 2012, 08:59:09 PM
How did this pass anti-trust muster? Disney owning the Star Wars and Indiana Jones franchises turns it into an even bigger powerhouse than it was before.
Well, Star Wars at any rate. The Indiana Jones franchise is dead unless Disney can clone a younger Harrison Ford.
Quote from: Neil on October 30, 2012, 10:53:30 PM
Well, Star Wars at any rate. The Indiana Jones franchise is dead unless Disney can clone a younger Harrison Ford.
Well, Dennis Quaid is doing a pretty good job of being Harrison Ford at T-10-15 years. Of course, he's only got a couple of years until his sell-by date passes, too.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on October 31, 2012, 12:12:02 AM
Dennis Quaid is doing a pretty good job of being Harrison Ford
:wacko:
Harrison Ford drank from the Holy Grail. He's totally up for another few adventures. Fuck you you blasphemous idiot.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 31, 2012, 12:15:59 AM
:wacko:
Dude, have you even seen an episode of Vegas? He may not be Harrison Ford, but I'm convinced he's as close as you can get.
Sean Connery drank from it too but they killed his character off. <_<
I've seen him do as adequately as Ford in dramatic roles, never seen him pull off action hero. Which is all anybody except maybe CDM is really interested in from Ford.
It perplexes me adult people still care about the Star Wars franchise. :huh:
Why would kids care about it? They've grown up with several franchises with much better effects than the originals and all-around better than the prequels.
Quote from: Martinus on October 31, 2012, 01:19:30 AM
It perplexes me adult people still care about the Star Wars franchise. :huh:
Anyone who believes their cinematic pallet is too mature to enjoy
Empire Strikes Bike is an idiot and a philistine in equal measure.
Come to think of it, Disney could now go for a Donald Duck/Spiderman/Miss Piggy/Darth Vader crossover. :lol:
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/10/30/disney-acquires-all-of-lucasfilm-including-lucasarts/
QuoteStar Wars' universe is ruled by an all-powerful elderly man who's known for controlling the masses with unspeakable technological horrors and shooting lightning out of his fingertips. I'm talking, of course, about George Lucas. However, in the most exciting twist the franchise has seen since "I am your father," he's now mostly out of the picture. Disney has officially purchased Lucasfilm – all technologies, IPs, and rights to every property – for $4.05 billion. We now live in a world where Pixar or Joss Whedon heading up a new Star Wars film is a very real possibility. But what does this mean for videogames? Could we finally get that Ewok tractor-driving simulator everyone's been clamoring for? Or Grim Fandango 2 developed by the team that made Disney Princess: My Fairytale Adventure? We can only hope. So far, though, here's what we know for sure.
For LucasArts – who's currently developing Star Wars 1313, among others – things seem to be moving full steam ahead. At least, for now. A rep explained the situation to Polygon: "For the time being all projects are business as usual. We are excited about all the possibilities that Disney brings."
The gaming future for the likes of Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and their kin, however, isn't looking so bright. Don't get me wrong: Until Disney converts its media empire into a regular Empire and blows up the Earth with a Mickey-Mouse-shaped Death Star, there will always be Star Wars games. But you know how there's only, like, one big-budget semi-interesting Disney game and a billion mobile/social franchise tie-ins? Well, that.
"We're likely to focus more on social and mobile than we are on console," said Disney CEO Robert Iger during a conference call. "We'll look opportunistically at console, most likely in licensing rather than publishing, but we think that given the nature of these characters and how well known they are, and the storytelling, that they lend themselves quite nicely, as they've already demonstrated to the other platforms."
Granted, that does leave the door open for third-parties to get involved, but I can't imagine licensing Star Wars will be cheap. Old-school LucasArts adventures, though? That might be another story. Hmmmmmmmmm.
Also worth considering: the case of Star Wars: The Old Republic. Depending on the terms of the deal, it could be affected in any number of ways, so I've sent a mail to EA and BioWare about it. I'll update this post as soon as I hear back.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fgm66L.jpg&hash=29e2253ad413bbb9a4bb7f56633061bf2cb5e261)
Still, this feels kind of like Lucas finally being fed up with the constant criticism of his "creative vision" in recent years.
"Think you can do better? Here! Have at it!"
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 31, 2012, 01:30:39 AM
Why would kids care about it? They've grown up with several franchises with much better effects than the originals and all-around better than the prequels.
Still, Star Wars are the very definition of overrated to me. I did not dislike the movies, but I didn't find them that good either. Just another take on the "hero's journey", only with weird aliens. I thought Star Trek was better.
Besides, what I find perplexing is people who watched and liked the movies as kids, and now seem to care about new movies of the same franchise being made for kids that they do not like. Why is that relevant? I liked Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles as a kid but I couldn't care less if they now made a new series about them that was crappy.
That being said, I don't rewatch movies I have seen as a matter of course. There are maybe a dozen of movies I watched more than once and in almost all cases this was situational (like watching a movie with someone else who wanted to see it for the first time, or watching a re-run on tv when there was nothing better to do). People who watch the same movie over and over again seem somewhat autistic to me - I bet you haven't seen all good movies and read all good books out there so why repeat a familiar experience over and over again when you can try something new?
Quote from: Queequeg on October 31, 2012, 01:32:46 AM
Quote from: Martinus on October 31, 2012, 01:19:30 AM
It perplexes me adult people still care about the Star Wars franchise. :huh:
Anyone who believes their cinematic pallet is too mature to enjoy Empire Strikes Bike is an idiot and a philistine in equal measure.
Give me HBO instead any time of the day. But I am not surprised to find such immature attitude coming from you, considering your overall stances on things.
Quote from: Martinus on October 31, 2012, 02:23:55 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 31, 2012, 01:32:46 AM
Quote from: Martinus on October 31, 2012, 01:19:30 AM
It perplexes me adult people still care about the Star Wars franchise. :huh:
Anyone who believes their cinematic pallet is too mature to enjoy Empire Strikes Bike is an idiot and a philistine in equal measure.
Give me HBO instead any time of the day. But I am not surprised to find such immature attitude coming from you, considering your overall stances on things.
Eisenstein directed
Nevsky, and most of the great Noir and early Sci-Fi works had a similarly childish or pulpy reputation for many years.
Empire is a work of art, something Six Feet Under or even Game of Thrones aren't. Comparing
Empire to The Wire or Deadwoood would just make no sense.
Star Wars was already killed by the prequels.
Where this should be wonderful though is in killing off people bringing up the expanded universe vong crap in star wars discussions.
Somebody ban Martinus. Too much is just too much.
I like it when people put on airs of cultural snobbery and superiority. It says so much about them.
Star Wars 7 Plot Will Be "an Original Story," Says Lucasfilm Source
http://uk.eonline.com/news/358685/star-wars-7-plot-will-be-an-original-story-says-lucasfilm-source (http://uk.eonline.com/news/358685/star-wars-7-plot-will-be-an-original-story-says-lucasfilm-source)
Original crap. Just like the prequels.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 31, 2012, 12:55:54 AM
I've seen him do as adequately as Ford in dramatic roles, never seen him pull off action hero. Which is all anybody except maybe CDM is really interested in from Ford.
Regarding Henry was inspirational. :mad:
Now Lucas can concentrate on the sequel to Red Tails.
Red Tails 2: Electric Bugaloo
Red Tails 2: Movin' On Up
Tyler Perry's Red Tails 2: Madea kills some motherfucking Nazis
Has it been long enough since the prequels that a whole new generation's childhood will be raped? :hmm:
If we went through it, then the Assburger's Generation deserves to as well. Cycle of life, and all that.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fp.twimg.com%2FA6hmFwqCUAAhHMj.jpg&hash=9ba13ba30626f56ccfa342f83f94a572fe7842fc)
Quote from: Brazen on October 31, 2012, 06:15:13 AM
Has it been long enough since the prequels that a whole new generation's childhood will be raped? :hmm:
Like I asked before, why would they develop such a strong attachment to the prequels in the first place?
Quote from: Tamas on October 31, 2012, 02:47:27 AM
Somebody ban Martinus. Too much is just too much.
Delusions of taste and adequacy are par for the course with him. What you're feeling now is how Minsky felt when Martinus was talking about how he loved adulterate his wine.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on October 30, 2012, 08:59:09 PM
How did this pass anti-trust muster? Disney owning the Star Wars and Indiana Jones franchises turns it into an even bigger powerhouse than it was before.
Could you even, theoretically, have a monopoly on fictional shit? Even if you owned every ownable property in the world, more properties are always going to be invented by others and that's before figuring in the insurpassable number of properties in the public domain.
I better get a box set of the originals untouched by Lucas' later faggotry.
Quote from: Queequeg on October 31, 2012, 12:23:55 AM
Harrison Ford drank from the Holy Grail. He's totally up for another few adventures. Fuck you you blasphemous idiot.
It doesn't work once you cross the seal. They explain this, and the guy that's been there for 700 years probably knows (in fact, it only seems to retard aging even within the bounds God apparently set for it, or maybe the knight's just been starving to death over the centuries since I didn't see a greenhouse anywhere). In any event, the Grail is by far the most useless of all the relics Jones goes after in the movies. At least you could cook something or heat up a bath with the sankara stones. I'd be pretty pissed once I found out, and I imagine the Joneses were, but they don't deal with this fallout in the film because they're just happy to be alive and to have sorted out their estrangement.
Stupid ass Last Crusade.
You lie.
:D I've never seen either movie.
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 31, 2012, 08:19:55 AM
Quote from: sbr on October 31, 2012, 08:18:51 AM
:D I've never seen either movie.
WTF
Bullshitting about shit we know nothing about is a time-honored Languish tradition, man.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 08:23:39 AM
Bullshitting about shit we know nothing about is a time-honored Languish tradition, man.
Sure, but how could a man over 30 have missed Last Crusade? :hmm:
Was last crusade the one with connery and the holy grail? I did see that a long time agobut just barely I wasn't paying attention.
Quote from: Neil on October 31, 2012, 07:36:19 AM
Quote from: Tamas on October 31, 2012, 02:47:27 AM
Somebody ban Martinus. Too much is just too much.
Delusions of taste and adequacy are par for the course with him. What you're feeling now is how Minsky felt when Martinus was talking about how he loved adulterate his wine.
He also likes to pretend he doesn't ever feel any Nostalgia. Must be a communist thing.
Quote from: Martinus on October 31, 2012, 02:06:09 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 31, 2012, 01:30:39 AM
Why would kids care about it? They've grown up with several franchises with much better effects than the originals and all-around better than the prequels.
Still, Star Wars are the very definition of overrated to me. I did not dislike the movies, but I didn't find them that good either. Just another take on the "hero's journey", only with weird aliens. I thought Star Trek was better.
Besides, what I find perplexing is people who watched and liked the movies as kids, and now seem to care about new movies of the same franchise being made for kids that they do not like. Why is that relevant? I liked Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles as a kid but I couldn't care less if they now made a new series about them that was crappy.
I know you are trolling the fanboys a bit ;) , but you do have a point - and it isn't limited to Star Wars. In general, the adult public is not willing to draw any boundaries any more between what they liked as kids, and what they continue to like as adults - to the point where the biggest thing in movies is sequels and "reboots" of stuff people in earlier decades would have considered, basically, kid's stuff - like comic book superheros. Nowadays. it mostly isn't kids going to see that stuff, but adults.
Hopefully this process will stop with stuff boys liked as adolescents, or we can look forward in the future to reboots of Thomas the Tank Engine, the Broadway Musical. ;)
Not that I dislike stuff like Star Wars and comic superheros (when well done). It's just a bit odd, is all.
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 08:49:01 AM
Quote from: Martinus on October 31, 2012, 02:06:09 AM
Besides, what I find perplexing is people who watched and liked the movies as kids, and now seem to care about new movies of the same franchise being made for kids that they do not like. Why is that relevant? I liked Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles as a kid but I couldn't care less if they now made a new series about them that was crappy.
I know you are trolling the fanboys a bit ;) , but you do have a point - and it isn't limited to Star Wars. In general, the adult public is not willing to draw any boundaries any more between what they liked as kids, and what they continue to like as adults - to the point where the biggest thing in movies is sequels and "reboots" of stuff people in earlier decades would have considered, basically, kid's stuff - like comic book superheros. Nowadays. it mostly isn't kids going to see that stuff, but adults.
You also have to remember that Martinus is thinking like a European; while we North Americans hold our childhoods as pleasant remembrances and the most cherished parts of our lives, the European outlook on childhood is full of cynicism and disdain, where children should be well-prepared by age 6 for the assraping absurdism of adulthood.
It's just another example of the cultural disconnect between us and the self-important Balls Of Light.
For a time the original trilogy was underrated due to the influence of the prequels dragging muck through the universe. Now they are overrated as people dream of getting their unedited versions back. Really, they are just decent space opera movies with revolutionary effects for the time. Empire is the best of them, but that just makes it very good not brilliant.
Quote from: Martinus on October 31, 2012, 02:06:09 AM
Besides, what I find perplexing is people who watched and liked the movies as kids, and now seem to care about new movies of the same franchise being made for kids that they do not like.
Really? Kids liked all that boring political shit?
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 08:49:01 AM
Hopefully this process will stop with stuff boys liked as adolescents, or we can look forward in the future to reboots of Thomas the Tank Engine, the Broadway Musical. ;)
Dude. My son loves Thomas the Tank Engine and sometimes I will pull up some Youtube videos of it for him and sure enough there are comments from probably late teens whining the new CGI Thomas is raping their childhood or some shit.
Quote from: Valmy on October 31, 2012, 09:05:32 AM
and sure enough there are comments from probably late teens whining the new CGI Thomas is raping their childhood or some shit.
And rightfully so. CGI Thomas. Whiff Thomas Ferdinand.
Quote from: Tamas on October 31, 2012, 02:47:27 AM
Somebody ban Martinus. Too much is just too much.
He is a dude who was obsessed with Glee so I laugh at his pretentions of cultural snobbishness.
Quote from: Valmy on October 31, 2012, 09:05:32 AM
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 08:49:01 AM
Hopefully this process will stop with stuff boys liked as adolescents, or we can look forward in the future to reboots of Thomas the Tank Engine, the Broadway Musical. ;)
Dude. My son loves Thomas the Tank Engine and sometimes I will pull up some Youtube videos of it for him and sure enough there are comments from probably late teens whining the new CGI Thomas is raping their childhood or some shit.
Well, I guess that was inevitable. :lol:
Problem is, in the future a movie won't make money unless it is a reboot of Thomas or the Wiggles or some such.
Who knows, since Lucas won't be directing this time they might *might* get somebody interesting to do it. It's Disney, though. Stuff only works when they aren't directly meddling with it (see Pixar and Marvel).
As one who remembers watching the original Star Wars movie in the movie theatres during its original run (I remember it was Christmas Day. Probably 1978), I can't wait for this. Yeah it's all about nostalgia. And yeah it will suck, but nothing can be worse than the three prequels.
Quote from: Josephus on October 31, 2012, 10:21:58 AM
As one who remembers watching the original Star Wars movie in the movie theatres during its original run (I remember it was Christmas Day. Probably 1978), I can't wait for this. Yeah it's all about nostalgia. And yeah it will suck, but nothing can be worse than the three prequels.
I take it you never saw the (in)famous "Star Wars Christmas Special". :D
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 10:28:36 AM
I take it you never saw the (in)famous "Star Wars Christmas Special". :D
I remember that was the longest week of my life, waiting for that show to come on. It was all the talk of the elementary school cafeteria. The anticipation was paralyzing.
And then, when it came on, it was the longest hour of my life. DADDY MAKE IT STOP
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 10:28:36 AM
Quote from: Josephus on October 31, 2012, 10:21:58 AM
As one who remembers watching the original Star Wars movie in the movie theatres during its original run (I remember it was Christmas Day. Probably 1978), I can't wait for this. Yeah it's all about nostalgia. And yeah it will suck, but nothing can be worse than the three prequels.
I take it you never saw the (in)famous "Star Wars Christmas Special". :D
I saw it recently on You Tube. yeah forgot about that.
Quote from: sbr on October 31, 2012, 08:17:27 AM
It was better than wyatt earp.
Tombstone was better than Wyatt Earp.
And I don't see why it is a good news. George Lucas made a travesty of Star Wars, even starting as early in Return of the Jedi by adding furries Ewoks to a movie that until then was pretty much going to be the darkest of the three, even darker than Empire Strikes Back. The prequels were made to milk a captive nerd audience, showcase CGI, cater even more to kids, and sell even more toys.
With Disney, it will mean that it will be even more catering to kids, selling more merch, and having Jar-Jar Binks mascots parading at Disneyland. That's probably why Lucas accepted Disney as a bidder, because he knew they had the same ideas than him when it came to milk Star Wars and rape its adult fans in the ass.
Quote from: Drakken on October 31, 2012, 10:50:28 AM
The prequels were made to milk a captive nerd audience, showcase CGI, cater even more to kids, and sell even more toys.
I just do not get how those films catered to kids. Really lame sexual tension romance, really long and boring conversations between people seated in council chambers, no clear hero to root for, and murder of children. I can see some parts in those films that kids would like but they were hardly catering the kids. I would think the original films were much more kid friendly. Clearly Luke Skywalker was the good guy and it was full of action and had a clear plot. The prequels have no clear good guy, little action among lots of boring crap, and convoluted plots. The Bad guy goes bad because he likes a girl, I would have thought that was totally lame as a kid.
Quote from: Drakken on October 31, 2012, 10:50:28 AM
That's probably why Lucas accepted Disney as a bidder, because he knew they had the same ideas than him when it came to milk Star Wars and rape its adult fans in the ass.
I'm pretty sure being able to toss Disney's $4B on top of his $3.3B personal net worth was the biggest driver. But raping adult fans was probably a close second.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 10:37:46 AM
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 10:28:36 AM
I take it you never saw the (in)famous "Star Wars Christmas Special". :D
I remember that was the longest week of my life, waiting for that show to come on. It was all the talk of the elementary school cafeteria. The anticipation was paralyzing.
And then, when it came on, it was the longest hour of my life. DADDY MAKE IT STOP
Aw, don't tell me that you never wanted to see an elderly wookie masturbating to Diahann Carroll. It's every kid's holiday dream! :D
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 08:49:01 AM
I know you are trolling the fanboys a bit ;) , but you do have a point - and it isn't limited to Star Wars. In general, the adult public is not willing to draw any boundaries any more between what they liked as kids, and what they continue to like as adults - to the point where the biggest thing in movies is sequels and "reboots" of stuff people in earlier decades would have considered, basically, kid's stuff - like comic book superheros. Nowadays. it mostly isn't kids going to see that stuff, but adults.
Which makes sense, if you think about it. Childhood lasts a very, very long time these days, and when you're in your 30s and 40s and you have nothing to do in your life, all you have is your hobbies.
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 10:28:36 AM
Quote from: Josephus on October 31, 2012, 10:21:58 AM
As one who remembers watching the original Star Wars movie in the movie theatres during its original run (I remember it was Christmas Day. Probably 1978), I can't wait for this. Yeah it's all about nostalgia. And yeah it will suck, but nothing can be worse than the three prequels.
I take it you never saw the (in)famous "Star Wars Christmas Special". :D
Weren't people sent to The Hague for that? Crimes against humanity and all that.
edit: much of it is indeed nostalgia. I wonder to what extent it is related to the somewhat fin de siècle atmosphere where the future might very well end up not being better (or rather: as optimistic) than what the first post-war generations had. And I wonder how it compares to what is going on in the newly rich regions, where things are very much better than what went before.
Quote from: Tyr on October 31, 2012, 02:41:21 AM
Star Wars was already killed by the prequels.
Where this should be wonderful though is in killing off people bringing up the expanded universe vong crap in star wars discussions.
The bad news is that this probably renders the Rogue Squadron books/comics non-canon. The awesome news is that there's no way Disney's going to let the Vong books stand as canon.
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 10:28:36 AM
I take it you never saw the (in)famous "Star Wars Christmas Special". :D
As a public service, I can start mailing around my DVD with SWHS and the RiffTrax commentary. Speaking of which, it's getting near time to inflict that on all my friends again. :menace:
Quote from: DontSayBanana on October 31, 2012, 11:58:23 AM
Quote from: Tyr on October 31, 2012, 02:41:21 AM
Star Wars was already killed by the prequels.
Where this should be wonderful though is in killing off people bringing up the expanded universe vong crap in star wars discussions.
The bad news is that this probably renders the Rogue Squadron books/comics non-canon. The awesome news is that there's no way Disney's going to let the Vong books stand as canon.
Pretty sure Lucas' on record saying that nothing of the Expanded Universe is canon.
Quote from: celedhring on October 31, 2012, 12:07:03 PM
Pretty sure Lucas' on record saying that nothing of the Expanded Universe is canon.
You'd think he'd be more accommodating for shit he gets royalties on.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 12:10:41 PM
Quote from: celedhring on October 31, 2012, 12:07:03 PM
Pretty sure Lucas' on record saying that nothing of the Expanded Universe is canon.
You'd think he'd be more accommodating for shit he gets royalties on.
Found the exact quote:
QuoteLUCAS: "I don't read that stuff. I haven't read any of the novels. I don't know anything about that world. That's a different world than my world. But I do try to keep it consistent. The way I do it now is they have a Star Wars Encyclopedia. So if I come up with a name or something else, I look it up and see if it has already been used. When I said [other people] could make their own Star Wars stories, we decided that, like Star Trek, we would have two universes: My universe and then this other one. They try to make their universe as consistent with mine as possible, but obviously they get enthusiastic and want to go off in other directions."
To be frank, it just makes sense. It would be impossible to keep consistency with all the hundreds of stuff released independently of the films.
ONLY I MAY DESTROY MY WORLD
Quote from: DontSayBanana on October 31, 2012, 12:00:20 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 10:28:36 AM
I take it you never saw the (in)famous "Star Wars Christmas Special". :D
As a public service, I can start mailing around my DVD with SWHS and the RiffTrax commentary. Speaking of which, it's getting near time to inflict that on all my friends again. :menace:
Amazed you still have any, if that's the case. :P
Actually, the whole thing sorta works as a public service advisory about the dangers of cocaine use. Poor Carrie Fisher! ;)
Ahh, The Star Wars Christmas Special. :wub:
:P
Another month and it'll be time for the yearly viewing.
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 12:22:56 PM
Quote from: DontSayBanana on October 31, 2012, 12:00:20 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 10:28:36 AM
I take it you never saw the (in)famous "Star Wars Christmas Special". :D
As a public service, I can start mailing around my DVD with SWHS and the RiffTrax commentary. Speaking of which, it's getting near time to inflict that on all my friends again. :menace:
Amazed you still have any, if that's the case. :P
With the Nelson/Murphy/Corbett commentary, it's pretty great; one of their better productions.
Also, at least last I checked, the Christmas Special is readily available on Google Video--so readily that, unless I'm remembering entirely incorrectly, the Rifftrax is timed on its source, a VHS that includes many of the commercials.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2012, 02:54:28 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 08:01:32 AM
Stupid ass Last Crusade.
Second best of the series.
No way, that would mean "Raiders" is only the third best. :whistle:
And that'd be right.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2012, 03:01:15 PM
With the Nelson/Murphy/Corbett commentary, it's pretty great; one of their better productions.
Also, at least last I checked, the Christmas Special is readily available on Google Video--so readily that, unless I'm remembering entirely incorrectly, the Rifftrax is timed on its source, a VHS that includes many of the commercials.
That's because ALL of the videos are based on that single source- it never even aired a second time. The RT crew just decided some of the ads were funny enough that they needed the riffs (and I imagine not having to edit them out kept the cost down, too).
Quote from: celedhring on October 31, 2012, 04:09:30 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2012, 02:54:28 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 08:01:32 AM
Stupid ass Last Crusade.
Second best of the series.
No way, that would mean "Raiders" is only the third best. :whistle:
You can't be claiming Temple of Doom or the fourth is the best, because that would be awful, just awful. Such crappy movies.
Quote from: frunk on October 31, 2012, 07:25:54 PM
Quote from: celedhring on October 31, 2012, 04:09:30 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2012, 02:54:28 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 08:01:32 AM
Stupid ass Last Crusade.
Second best of the series.
No way, that would mean "Raiders" is only the third best. :whistle:
You can't be claiming Temple of Doom or the fourth is the best, because that would be awful, just awful. Such crappy movies.
Well it is Ide....
Just in case Lucas himself didn't do enough to fuck up one of the very the best big screen villains ever, by making him a whiney emo little shit just wait until Disney gets a hold of him.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdeathstarpr.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F11%2FDarth-Vader_Mickey-Mouse-Ears.jpeg&hash=f977aa420bdc981a99d73fd099489b432c222640)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fp.twimg.com%2FA6hOF6KCMAEO8Ql.jpg&hash=5addaed6e5833f6a5d74934e3ea572f0cc1afba3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUbH1SEsqiE
Quote from: Drakken on October 31, 2012, 10:50:28 AM
The prequels were made to milk a captive nerd audience, showcase CGI, cater even more to kids, and sell even more toys.
Actually, I think the prequels were made to sell video games. The race in the first movie made a fantastically stupid&boring game (well it looked that way). The second one had a classic video game scene where characters walk/run on some chain and avoid deadly obstacles coming from above, designed to cut or crush them. Most 2D console video games had such a scene.
Quote
With Disney, it will mean that it will be even more catering to kids, selling more merch, and having Jar-Jar Binks mascots parading at Disneyland. That's probably why Lucas accepted Disney as a bidder, because he knew they had the same ideas than him when it came to milk Star Wars and rape its adult fans in the ass.
Maybe, maybe not. Disney did make some good stuff with Marvel. And John Carter was a good movie. And I think 2 or 3 of the Alamo movies were from them.
You see Disney as the Disney we had when we were kids. The Disney Hour and such. The Rob Roy movies, the Davy Crockett shows.
You fail to grasp how it's a financial company, a holding, with multiple divisions, each with their own creative vision (or lack of if you are cynical).
Disney is there to grab the profits from all the IP. They're not there for Lucas Vision, or for anyone else's vision. Crossovers, or kiddifying the movies or eventual tv show or tv movies would be bad. Why? They already got the Clone Wars for that crowd. And the Lego Star Wars.
I have hopes, because I think, in terms of profit, they know their best bet is to be true to the essence of Star Wars: a fairy tale for adults.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on October 31, 2012, 11:58:23 AM
The bad news is that this probably renders the Rogue Squadron books/comics non-canon. The awesome news is that there's no way Disney's going to let the Vong books stand as canon.
everything that came after is canon, so forget it. There's way too much retcon, and there are actually a few good novels.
Also, they tied it in to the prequels, so there's no way they are making anything non canon.
Unless they decide to go the Star Trek way. A reboot with a parallel universe involving time travel. That's be cool... :P (sarcasm, here)
EDIT:
Here is the official statement about canon:
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Canon
Quote"We've stuck to a very clear branding strategy for the past decade. This is Star Wars. Individual movies come and go, as do TV shows, video games, books. They all contribute to the lore of Star Wars, but in the end it is one saga and that saga is called Star Wars. We've wanted to send a clear message to our fans that everything we do is part of that overall saga." ―Jim Ward[src] (http://www.starwars.com/collecting/news/misc/news20080204.html)
Well, the Old Republic setting (comics, games etc.) is kind of a re-imagining of the Star Wars universe. :P
Quote from: katmai on October 31, 2012, 07:53:47 PM
Quote from: frunk on October 31, 2012, 07:25:54 PM
Quote from: celedhring on October 31, 2012, 04:09:30 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2012, 02:54:28 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 08:01:32 AM
Stupid ass Last Crusade.
Second best of the series.
No way, that would mean "Raiders" is only the third best. :whistle:
You can't be claiming Temple of Doom or the fourth is the best, because that would be awful, just awful. Such crappy movies.
Well it is Ide....
1-Doom
2-Raiders
3-Crusade
.
.
.
.
.
67-Crystal Skull
IMHO
And I have had hourlong arguments about Doom. I'll just say one thing about why I think it's the best of the lot: since that gong is hit it is possibly the most frantic rollercoaster of escapist vintage adventure ever done. It has rough edges, but the thing just doesn't fucking stop throwing stuff at you: Chinese mobsters, magic stones, monkey brains,dark exotic cults, hidden temples, bugs, mine wagons, dangling bridges... it's the quintessential 80s movie. Raiders is great, but it doesn't have that exhilarating pace to it, in my opinion.
Doom is pretty great but the lameass save the children bit keeps it from reaching raiders heights.
I really don't get the crystal skull hate. It was pretty decent. Certainly not the attrocity the star wars prequels were. And since it was a sequel it didn't really shit on the canon the way the prequels did either.
I recall the girl I went to see it with only knew of Indianna Jones as the crappy TV show and had never seen the originals. :lol:
Lucas biographer says that new films will be about Luke Sywalker in his 30's and 40's.
http://www.metro.co.uk/film/916644-star-wars-7-could-feature-middle-aged-luke-says-lucas-biographer (http://www.metro.co.uk/film/916644-star-wars-7-could-feature-middle-aged-luke-says-lucas-biographer)
Episode 7: Luke gets a prostate exam
Quote from: Phillip V on November 01, 2012, 12:31:02 PM
Lucas biographer says that new films will be about Luke Sywalker in his 30's and 40's.
http://www.metro.co.uk/film/916644-star-wars-7-could-feature-middle-aged-luke-says-lucas-biographer (http://www.metro.co.uk/film/916644-star-wars-7-could-feature-middle-aged-luke-says-lucas-biographer)
Headline says "could", not "will."
Quote from: celedhring on November 01, 2012, 05:37:25 AM
1-Doom
2-Raiders
3-Crusade
.
.
.
.
.
67-Crystal Skull
IMHO
And I have had hourlong arguments about Doom. I'll just say one thing about why I think it's the best of the lot: since that gong is hit it is possibly the most frantic rollercoaster of escapist vintage adventure ever done. It has rough edges, but the thing just doesn't fucking stop throwing stuff at you: Chinese mobsters, magic stones, monkey brains,dark exotic cults, hidden temples, bugs, mine wagons, dangling bridges... it's the quintessential 80s movie. Raiders is great, but it doesn't have that exhilarating pace to it, in my opinion.
1. Two of the most annoying sidekicks in the history of cinema until Lucas outdid himself with Jar-Jar.
2. Flat out preposterous and stupid action scenes, like sledding down the himalayas in an inflatable life raft dropped from a crashing plane.
The pace doesn't help when you insult the intelligence and then annoy to distraction the audience almost from the beginning. It's even worse when Raiders did so well on both these points.
Of course the real order is:
Raiders
.
.
.
Crusade/Crystal Skull
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Doom
Quote from: Syt on November 01, 2012, 12:56:47 PM
Quote from: Phillip V on November 01, 2012, 12:31:02 PM
Lucas biographer says that new films will be about Luke Sywalker in his 30's and 40's.
http://www.metro.co.uk/film/916644-star-wars-7-could-feature-middle-aged-luke-says-lucas-biographer (http://www.metro.co.uk/film/916644-star-wars-7-could-feature-middle-aged-luke-says-lucas-biographer)
Headline says "could", not "will."
Read the text/interview, not the headline.
Only immature adults give a fuck about Star Wars or Indy.
I love Starship Troopers but it doesn't matter at all to me that they've made a bunch of crappy sequels.
Quote from: Tyr on November 01, 2012, 06:17:33 AM
I really don't get the crystal skull hate. It was pretty decent. Certainly not the attrocity the star wars prequels were. And since it was a sequel it didn't really shit on the canon the way the prequels did either.
I recall the girl I went to see it with only knew of Indianna Jones as the crappy TV show and had never seen the originals. :lol:
Skull is "bearable" until they reach the temple at the end. Then you have the entire last act of the movie where Indy does absolutely nothing and even the villains just kill themselves with their lust for power; something which ruled the first time in Raiders but here it just felt like an unimaginative rehash.
Quote from: viper37 on October 31, 2012, 10:38:18 PM
You see Disney as the Disney we had when we were kids. The Disney Hour and such. The Rob Roy movies, the Davy Crockett shows.
You fail to grasp how it's a financial company, a holding, with multiple divisions, each with their own creative vision (or lack of if you are cynical).
Disney is there to grab the profits from all the IP. They're not there for Lucas Vision, or for anyone else's vision.
Bingo.
Making movies is expensive but where is the revenue to come from? DVDs don't sell like they used to and people to go to the movies as often as in the golden age. There is competition for attention from the cable players and youtube. Star power is no longer a consistent draw and the A-list carries a heavy cost. If a studio is going to pile big bucks into a blockbuster special effects extranvangza it wants to make sure it gets it back and the days of just casting Arnold and counting the money are over.
Big media players in this business like Disney are looking for relative predictability and opportunities to diversify and extend the media stream. Buying portfolios of IP and brands that are familiar and can be exploited over and over in different media fills that need. Disney learned that trick long ago with its own brands (Mickey Mouse doesn't demand $20M and argue with the director) and is just applying that same model to properties others initially developed. They will continue to develop new properties of course, just incrementally, cautiously , and always with an eye to franchise possibilities and retail spin-off (a combination which favors animation over live).
Having a - modest - experience dealing with Hollywood, I can say I have seen few people more risk-adverse than a studio executive. Everything you pitch them has to be connected with something similar that has worked in the past. The "Jaws meets Wuthering Heights" jokes are actually more on the money than people think.
The problem is that with more and more competing entertainment, prices have been driven up, as you have to create bigger and bigger "events" to get people out of their home cinemas, and margins are down. Twenty years ago a regular movie was expected to be profitable on its US release alone; now that's a miracle and the reliance on foreign BO and ancillary markets is bigger than ever. That's the reason why 20 years ago films took more gambles, while we are now flooded with recycled material: adaptations from successful properties of other media, remakes and sequels.
Quote from: celedhring on November 01, 2012, 03:34:48 PM
Having a - modest - experience dealing with Hollywood, I can say I have seen few people more risk-adverse than a studio executive. Everything you pitch them has to be connected with something similar that has worked in the past. The "Jaws meets Wuthering Heights" jokes are actually more on the money than people think.
The problem is that with more and more competing entertainment, prices have been driven up, as you have to create bigger and bigger "events" to get people out of their home cinemas, and margins are down. Twenty years ago a regular movie was expected to be profitable on its US release alone; now that's a miracle and the reliance on foreign BO and ancillary markets is bigger than ever. That's the reason why 20 years ago films took more gambles, while we are now flooded with recycled material: adaptations from successful properties of other media, remakes and sequels.
Porn Valley doesn't count.
Damn.
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2012, 08:49:01 AM
I know you are trolling the fanboys a bit ;) , but you do have a point - and it isn't limited to Star Wars. In general, the adult public is not willing to draw any boundaries any more between what they liked as kids, and what they continue to like as adults - to the point where the biggest thing in movies is sequels and "reboots" of stuff people in earlier decades would have considered, basically, kid's stuff - like comic book superheros. Nowadays. it mostly isn't kids going to see that stuff, but adults.
Hopefully this process will stop with stuff boys liked as adolescents, or we can look forward in the future to reboots of Thomas the Tank Engine, the Broadway Musical. ;)
Not that I dislike stuff like Star Wars and comic superheros (when well done). It's just a bit odd, is all.
I think there's a big difference between adult men watching Thundercats and me watching Princess Mononoke or Star Wars. The first was terrible in the first place and nostalgia shouldn't make a damn bit of difference. The other two are roundly excellent, and nostalgia may be a part of my enjoyment but it's not all of it.
Star Wars and Empire are just, flat out, two of the best adventure films of all time. They've aged incredibly well, especially considering how quickly some of the 70s looked dated.
Quote from: Syt on November 01, 2012, 01:01:55 PM
Of course the real order is:
Raiders
Crusade/Crystal Skull
Doom
Crusade has the best screenplay in action-adventure history. No way it's comparable to that alien piece of shit.
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 07:13:54 PM
Quote from: Syt on November 01, 2012, 01:01:55 PM
Of course the real order is:
Raiders
Crusade/Crystal Skull
Doom
Crusade has the best screenplay in action-adventure history. No way it's comparable to that alien piece of shit.
Pretty sure large chunks of Crusade were actually improvised. Connery reportedly ignored the script most of the time. He's brilliant in it, mind! And the tank sequence when they head to the temple Spielberg made up on the fly... sometimes lightning just strikes, I guess.
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 07:12:21 PM
I think there's a big difference between adult men watching Thundercats and me watching Princess Mononoke or Star Wars. The first was terrible in the first place and nostalgia shouldn't make a damn bit of difference. The other two are roundly excellent, and nostalgia may be a part of my enjoyment but it's not all of it.
No, there really isn't. Stop trying to be special. Your tastes are not objective.
Quote from: Neil on November 01, 2012, 08:47:28 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 07:12:21 PM
I think there's a big difference between adult men watching Thundercats and me watching Princess Mononoke or Star Wars. The first was terrible in the first place and nostalgia shouldn't make a damn bit of difference. The other two are roundly excellent, and nostalgia may be a part of my enjoyment but it's not all of it.
No, there really isn't. Stop trying to be special. Your tastes are not objective.
You are seriously comparing Thundercats to Princess Mononoke?
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 08:49:16 PM
Quote from: Neil on November 01, 2012, 08:47:28 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 07:12:21 PM
I think there's a big difference between adult men watching Thundercats and me watching Princess Mononoke or Star Wars. The first was terrible in the first place and nostalgia shouldn't make a damn bit of difference. The other two are roundly excellent, and nostalgia may be a part of my enjoyment but it's not all of it.
No, there really isn't. Stop trying to be special. Your tastes are not objective.
You are seriously comparing Thundercats to Princess Mononoke?
Of course not. One was a TV show.
Then you don't think there is a difference between nostalgia fueling a love of Casablanca and nostalgia fueling a love of Nickelback?
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 08:49:16 PM
Quote from: Neil on November 01, 2012, 08:47:28 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 07:12:21 PM
I think there's a big difference between adult men watching Thundercats and me watching Princess Mononoke or Star Wars. The first was terrible in the first place and nostalgia shouldn't make a damn bit of difference. The other two are roundly excellent, and nostalgia may be a part of my enjoyment but it's not all of it.
No, there really isn't. Stop trying to be special. Your tastes are not objective.
You are seriously comparing Thundercats to Princess Mononoke?
Are you seriously suggesting there is some big difference?
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 09:33:52 PM
Then you don't think there is a difference between nostalgia fueling a love of Casablanca and nostalgia fueling a love of Nickelback?
You should love Casablanca cause it's a great movie, not because you saw it as a kid.
Quote from: frunk on November 01, 2012, 01:00:51 PM
1. Two of the most annoying sidekicks in the history of cinema until Lucas outdid himself with Jar-Jar.
This is the issue I can never get past with that film.
I agree that Crystal Skull was actually pretty fun until they got to the temple. I still prefer it to Temple of Doom.
Quote from: celedhring on November 01, 2012, 03:34:48 PM
That's the reason why 20 years ago films took more gambles, while we are now flooded with recycled material: adaptations from successful properties of other media, remakes and sequels.
I would say that has more to do with the recession hitting us were people have less money, so they won't really "take a chance" with a movie.
Because there is still original content being done in Hollywood. And there was a load of crap being done 20-40-60 years ago. Every Hollywood movie I've seen from the 50s and 60s figures the same wooden actresses, totally hysterical, needing to be either rescued or slapped around to their senses by their male. Every John Wayne movie looks&feel the same, plus a few extra cow boys movies where they try a new John Wayne.
So, no, i have to disagree, that Hollywood is only now producing crap and everything was better before: they have always made bad movies, alongside some very good ones.
Short Round was hilarious. "No time for love, doctah Jones, we got company!"
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 09:33:52 PM
Then you don't think there is a difference between nostalgia fueling a love of Casablanca and nostalgia fueling a love of Nickelback?
Does anyone love Nickelback because of nostalgia?
Quote from: viper37 on November 01, 2012, 09:58:05 PM
Every Hollywood movie I've seen from the 50s and 60s figures the same wooden actresses, totally hysterical, needing to be either rescued or slapped around to their senses by their male.
You've been checking out the wrong ones then.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 01, 2012, 09:47:40 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 09:33:52 PM
Then you don't think there is a difference between nostalgia fueling a love of Casablanca and nostalgia fueling a love of Nickelback?
You should love Casablanca cause it's a great movie, not because you saw it as a kid.
They aren't mutually exclusive, obviously.
Hm, Lucas wants to donate at least a billion to an education focused charity.
Quote from: Syt on November 02, 2012, 02:19:07 AM
Hm, Lucas wants to donate at least a billion to an education focused charity.
Should have spent it on low income housing.
Quote from: Syt on November 02, 2012, 02:19:07 AM
Hm, Lucas wants to donate at least a billion to an education focused charity.
This is supposed to make it all OK?
I'll be starting a Languish Education Fund if anyone wants to get in on this action.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on November 02, 2012, 03:09:52 AM
Quote from: Syt on November 02, 2012, 02:19:07 AM
Hm, Lucas wants to donate at least a billion to an education focused charity.
Should have spent it on low income housing.
:lol: I wonder if that's still going thru.
Quote from: Syt on November 02, 2012, 02:19:07 AM
Hm, Lucas wants to donate at least a billion to an education focused charity.
Does he want support the fine Electrical Engineering Students of Languish?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgeektyrant.com%2Fstorage%2F0999-post-images%2Fnukingfridge4122012.png&hash=58e42c368d1ae405c1f601a07d6a7946f2e3b687)
:lol:
Quote from: Valmy on November 02, 2012, 12:46:42 PM
Quote from: Syt on November 02, 2012, 02:19:07 AM
Hm, Lucas wants to donate at least a billion to an education focused charity.
Does he want support the fine Electrical Engineering Students of Languish?
Engineer the fat out of his neck.
I guess Siegebreaker will be happy with the merger:
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/14205_10151516293129988_1828631641_n.jpg)
I came.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 03, 2012, 03:32:35 AM
I came.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK76TwRkibQ :hug:
Where's Belle?
I've seen Chewie do two female Stormtroopers, so that doesn't even sound weird anymore.
Quote from: The Brain on November 01, 2012, 01:38:07 PM
Only immature adults give a fuck about Star Wars or Indy.
I love Starship Troopers but it doesn't matter at all to me that they've made a bunch of crappy sequels.
I love Henlein, but it doesn't matter at all to me that they've made a crappy movie.
Quote from: Syt on November 03, 2012, 04:14:06 AM
I've seen Chewie do two female Stormtroopers, so that doesn't even sound weird anymore.
Where?
YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW
Quote from: Phillip V on November 03, 2012, 04:35:02 AM
Quote from: Syt on November 03, 2012, 04:14:06 AM
I've seen Chewie do two female Stormtroopers, so that doesn't even sound weird anymore.
Where?
In the butt.
Quote from: The Brain on November 03, 2012, 04:47:27 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 03, 2012, 04:44:02 AM
Quote from: Phillip V on November 03, 2012, 04:35:02 AM
Quote from: Syt on November 03, 2012, 04:14:06 AM
I've seen Chewie do two female Stormtroopers, so that doesn't even sound weird anymore.
Where?
In the butt.
Two females one butt? :huh:
2 girls, one Hutt.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm1.staticflickr.com%2F88%2F246137111_d157d4d9a9_n.jpg&hash=9125e9dcf489b87867690c561f23e266846044cc)
"This year a quarter of Lucasfilm's revenue—around $200m—will come from licensing toy droids, Sith Lord helmets and the like. That is not bad for a year which has not, alas, seen a new "Star Wars" film."
http://www.economist.com/news/business/21565649-disney-buys-out-george-lucas-creator-%E2%80%9Cstar-wars%E2%80%9D-wishing-upon-death-star
QuoteBut the real prize in Lucasfilm may be its technology. Hollywood today is in a "special effects arms race", says the boss of a major studio. Lucasfilm's THX sound systems and Industrial Light & Magic special-effects unit are regarded as the best in the business. (Pixar sprang from Lucasfilm's animation technology.) Video games, which rely on special effects, are a bigger part of the business than ever.
Jeffrey Katzenberg, who co-founded DreamWorks Animation with Mr Spielberg and David Geffen after being forced out of Disney in 1994, recently described new animation technology as "maybe the most powerful paintbrush ever put in the hands of artists". In the past four years, Dreamworks, whose hits include "Shrek" and "Madagascar", has joined forces with Intel, a chipmaker, to devise even zappier technology.
...
In 2005, when the last "Star Wars" film was released, Lucasfilm generated around $550m in operating profit. Disney is hoping for similarly vast rewards.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.economist.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fimagecache%2F290-width%2Fimages%2Fprint-edition%2F20121103_WBC389.png&hash=b776f2b707ef79a356a15faf77b597bac4956985)
Quote from: Neil on November 01, 2012, 10:21:46 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 09:33:52 PM
Then you don't think there is a difference between nostalgia fueling a love of Casablanca and nostalgia fueling a love of Nickelback?
Does anyone love Nickelback?
Fixed.
Quote from: frunk on October 31, 2012, 07:25:54 PM
Quote from: celedhring on October 31, 2012, 04:09:30 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2012, 02:54:28 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 08:01:32 AM
Stupid ass Last Crusade.
Second best of the series.
No way, that would mean "Raiders" is only the third best. :whistle:
You can't be claiming Temple of Doom or the fourth is the best, because that would be awful, just awful. Such crappy movies.
Temple of Doom is the best. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is the fourth best. But both are great-to-excellent.
Thing is, Raiders is great too, but it lacks the plus factors possessed by Temple (horror) and Crusade (father-son bonding), that make them more engaging, more entertaining, and all-round better films. Raiders has been traditionally overrated simply because it was the first.
No, Raiders has something that none of the others have: The awesome power of the Ark turned loose to judge Nazis and Frenchmen.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 01, 2012, 06:04:22 AM
Doom is pretty great but the lameass save the children bit keeps it from reaching raiders heights.
Actually, that was another thing that Raiders lacked. Doom has an arc. It's easy to forget Doom is a prequel; Jones starts out Doom a
total asshole, concerned almost entirely with pursuit of treasure (you'd think for placement in a museum, but he's selling that priceless find for cash in the Chinese nightclub sequence, so he's clearly hit a bit of a personal ethical low). Doom actually gives him a character arc, and he winds up a
vaguely heroic asshole, who gives a shit about human suffering.
(Crusade also has a character arc, two in fact, which may be why it's second-best.)
Anyway, back to the main topic, I've heard that Disney won't be making Episode 7 based on the Zahn novels. Now, they weren't high literature, and my hazy memories of them record some problems I had with them even back as young as 14, but I do recall them being pretty good, and ripe for adaptation, so this kind of sucks. Moreover, if they decide to completely ignore all of the material that could be drawn from those novels, notably Admiral Thrawn (probably the best original character in the expanded universe), that would be a real shame.
Arc of Raiders is Indy learning to respect the supernatural. The Kali rocks cheapen that.
Quote from: Queequeg on November 04, 2012, 04:53:00 PM
Arc of Raiders is Indy learning to respect the supernatural. The Kali rocks cheapen that.
I'm trying to remember if he doubts the ark's power in Raiders. I believe he does, but at the end he seems fully prepared to treat it at face (lol) value. He reacts with calm and prudence in regards to YHWH jumping out of His box and failing to prevent the Holocaust.
He thinks thenArc is worthless until the "close your eyes, Marian" scene.
Quote from: Ideologue on November 04, 2012, 04:59:32 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 04, 2012, 04:53:00 PM
Arc of Raiders is Indy learning to respect the supernatural. The Kali rocks cheapen that.
I'm trying to remember if he doubts the ark's power in Raiders. I believe he does, but at the end he seems fully prepared to treat it at face (lol) value. He reacts with calm and prudence in regards to YHWH jumping out of His box and failing to prevent the Holocaust.
Remember when he's talking with Marcus before he gets on the flying boat to Nepal? He's not finding an Ark, he's finding faith in something.
Disney is looking to resurrect another piece of pop culture history. Following the news that the Mouse House had purchased Lucasfilm (and thus, the "Star Wars" franchise) for $4 billion earlier this week, the Disney Channel is in the early stages of developing a "Boy Meets World" sequel series.
The show, titled "Girl Meets World," would reportedly center on the preteen daughter of Cory Matthews and Topanga Lawrence, the stars of the original series. Sources tell TV Line that the network is currently courting Savage and Fishel to reprise their roles.
"Boy Meets World" ran for seven seasons on ABC from 1993-2000, ending with Cory and Topanga getting married and moving in together.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/02/boy-meets-world-sequel-series-disney_n_2068602.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/02/boy-meets-world-sequel-series-disney_n_2068602.html)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.huffpost.com%2Fgen%2F841419%2Fthumbs%2Fr-BOY-MEETS-WORLD-ORAL-HISTORY-large570.jpg%3F5&hash=a5fd8da99ad4e80a48c8fb7af64aaf4f9df9bd69)
Quote from: Ideologue on November 04, 2012, 04:51:29 PM
Anyway, back to the main topic, I've heard that Disney won't be making Episode 7 based on the Zahn novels. Now, they weren't high literature, and my hazy memories of them record some problems I had with them even back as young as 14, but I do recall them being pretty good, and ripe for adaptation, so this kind of sucks. Moreover, if they decide to completely ignore all of the material that could be drawn from those novels, notably Admiral Thrawn (probably the best original character in the expanded universe), that would be a real shame.
I have always thought they were more TV series material than film, if you ask me. Still have secret hopes that if Disney really whore this out, they'll eventually try to do a TV series and pick up expanded universe material for it.
Admiral Thrawn ruled, I was giddy when he was featured in the Tie Fighter videogame.
I dunno. The Expaded Universe sort of shit itself.
Well, I didn't read past the first few sagas they released, but the Thrawn series is/was great, and the others all have interesting ideas to pick up. I was also a teenager.
Quote from: Neil on November 04, 2012, 07:45:47 PM
I dunno. The Expaded Universe sort of shit itself.
Sure, but it produced a lot of good stuff before that point. While there were some stinkers (
The Courtship of Princess Leia,
The Crystal Star, etc.
I, Jedi, the Hand of Thrawn trilogy, and
Dark Empire were definitely pro-grade. Also, let's not forget the Rogue Squadron books (well, okay, we can forget
Starfighters of Adumar, but the rest were freaking awesome).
Oscar-winning writer Michael Arndt ("Toy Story 3," "Little Miss Sunshine," "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire") has penned a 40- to 50-page treatment for the film. It is rumored that the treatment is not just for "Episode VII" but for the next three movies.
The studio wants Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, and Han Solo in the film, though no deals have been made with the original actors. But Harrison Ford is reportedly up for returning to the series, and Carrie Fisher said that she definitely wants in.
http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/11/star-wars-episode-vii-michael-arndt-has-written-treatment-for-next-three-films.html (http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/11/star-wars-episode-vii-michael-arndt-has-written-treatment-for-next-three-films.html)
Quote from: Razgovory on November 01, 2012, 09:43:11 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 08:49:16 PM
Quote from: Neil on November 01, 2012, 08:47:28 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on November 01, 2012, 07:12:21 PM
I think there's a big difference between adult men watching Thundercats and me watching Princess Mononoke or Star Wars. The first was terrible in the first place and nostalgia shouldn't make a damn bit of difference. The other two are roundly excellent, and nostalgia may be a part of my enjoyment but it's not all of it.
No, there really isn't. Stop trying to be special. Your tastes are not objective.
You are seriously comparing Thundercats to Princess Mononoke?
Are you seriously suggesting there is some big difference?
Are you on fucking crack? Miyazaki is one of the greatest directors of all time.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fth03.deviantart.net%2Ffs71%2FPRE%2Fi%2F2012%2F305%2F3%2Ff%2Fdisney_princess_leia_by_bewareitbites-d5jobb5.jpg&hash=5d8b5de85f3e357104c0e1b9f8467299116a5595)
One part of me is offended. The other is wacking off.
I just spooged in shame as well.
Quote from: Ideologue on November 04, 2012, 04:51:29 PM
Anyway, back to the main topic, I've heard that Disney won't be making Episode 7 based on the Zahn novels. Now, they weren't high literature, and my hazy memories of them record some problems I had with them even back as young as 14, but I do recall them being pretty good, and ripe for adaptation, so this kind of sucks. Moreover, if they decide to completely ignore all of the material that could be drawn from those novels, notably Admiral Thrawn (probably the best original character in the expanded universe), that would be a real shame.
I hope they piss all over that vong crap. The EU fan rage will be hilarious.
Quote from: Tyr on November 11, 2012, 09:14:23 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on November 04, 2012, 04:51:29 PM
Anyway, back to the main topic, I've heard that Disney won't be making Episode 7 based on the Zahn novels. Now, they weren't high literature, and my hazy memories of them record some problems I had with them even back as young as 14, but I do recall them being pretty good, and ripe for adaptation, so this kind of sucks. Moreover, if they decide to completely ignore all of the material that could be drawn from those novels, notably Admiral Thrawn (probably the best original character in the expanded universe), that would be a real shame.
I hope they piss all over that vong crap. The EU fan rage will be hilarious.
I haven't read any of it, but I thought that the Thrawn stuff was written long before Vong were invented. Thrawn makes sense -- the Empire needs a Bel Riose -- but the Vong war sounds imbecilic. The actors are too old for the Thrawn stuff to be relevant, in any event.
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on November 11, 2012, 09:36:51 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 11, 2012, 09:14:23 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on November 04, 2012, 04:51:29 PM
Anyway, back to the main topic, I've heard that Disney won't be making Episode 7 based on the Zahn novels. Now, they weren't high literature, and my hazy memories of them record some problems I had with them even back as young as 14, but I do recall them being pretty good, and ripe for adaptation, so this kind of sucks. Moreover, if they decide to completely ignore all of the material that could be drawn from those novels, notably Admiral Thrawn (probably the best original character in the expanded universe), that would be a real shame.
I hope they piss all over that vong crap. The EU fan rage will be hilarious.
I haven't read any of it, but I thought that the Thrawn stuff was written long before Vong were invented. Thrawn makes sense -- the Empire needs a Bel Riose -- but the Vong war sounds imbecilic. The actors are too old for the Thrawn stuff to be relevant, in any event.
The original actors are too old for anything that doesn't have them as secondary characters, to be frank. Which brings me to my personal nightmare of having their kids carrying the sequels.
Star Wars: the new generation.
What people think would happen if they got recast, though? Star Trek got away with recasting Kirk and co., afterall.
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 31, 2012, 06:13:38 AM
Tyler Perry's Red Tails 2: Madea kills some motherfucking Nazis
:lol: ossum.
Quote from: celedhring on November 11, 2012, 09:46:42 AM
The original actors are too old for anything that doesn't have them as secondary characters, to be frank. Which brings me to my personal nightmare of having their kids carrying the sequels.
It's Star Wars. It got away with revealing Darth Vader to be Luke's father, after all. It's always been a soap opera.
Of course they can get away with having Han and Leia's kid being the star.
Quote from: Barrister on November 11, 2012, 03:29:13 PM
Quote from: celedhring on November 11, 2012, 09:46:42 AM
The original actors are too old for anything that doesn't have them as secondary characters, to be frank. Which brings me to my personal nightmare of having their kids carrying the sequels.
It's Star Wars. It got away with revealing Darth Vader to be Luke's father, after all. It's always been a soap opera.
Of course they can get away with having Han and Leia's kid being the star.
Maybe. It's not like you can just put a lightsabre in the hands of some asshole and turn it into a movie.
All those original Star Wars actors see a chance for them to pull in a decent paycheck for the first time in years. Harrison excepted, of course.
Quote from: Jaron on November 12, 2012, 12:34:48 AM
All those original Star Wars actors see a chance for them to pull in a decent paycheck for the first time in years. Harrison excepted, of course.
Mark Hamil must make decent money as the voice actor for the Joker.
I'm sure that was very lucrative for him.
Quote from: Jaron on November 12, 2012, 12:44:31 AM
I'm sure that was very lucrative for him.
Ah, but you said decent, not very lucrative.
And he's been doing it for like 15-20 years now, so that must help.
Quote from: Jaron on November 12, 2012, 12:34:48 AM
All those original Star Wars actors see a chance for them to pull in a decent paycheck for the first time in years. Harrison excepted, of course.
I thought I remembered hearing that all of the original actors took a small slice of the overall revenue when they signed up for the movie. Which means they're all doing just fine.
Quote from: Barrister on November 12, 2012, 12:56:39 AM
I thought I remembered hearing that all of the original actors took a small slice of the overall revenue when they signed up for the movie. Which means they're all doing just fine.
I don't think so. Apparently most of the cast thought it wouldn't do well so I think they accepted salaries. Guinness was an exception and he negotiated himself 2% of Lucas's gross revenues :lol:
It was Lucas who made out like a bandit, he got a huge percentage IIRC.
Quote from: Jaron on November 12, 2012, 12:34:48 AM
All those original Star Wars actors see a chance for them to pull in a decent paycheck for the first time in years. Harrison excepted, of course.
Hamil is a pretty successful voice actor.
Carrie Fisher did a lot of work as a script doctor in Hollywood. Not sure if this earns you much any money, though.
Quote from: Syt on November 12, 2012, 03:25:43 AM
Carrie Fisher did a lot of work as a script doctor in Hollywood. Not sure if this earns you much any money, though.
Oh it can earn you a very decent amount, not to mention the bestselling books she has written.
Per variety magazine...
QuoteFor Hollywood's dozen or so top-tier script doctors, that means commanding $250,000-$300,000 a week, being booked months in advance and keeping their efforts largely cloaked in anonymity.
I've a friend who is very into the movie business and who's who and all that, I remember him telling me about her a few weeks back. She has worked on some pretty big films apparently and yes, is making a tonne from it.
QuoteQuoteI thought I remembered hearing that all of the original actors took a small slice of the overall revenue when they signed up for the movie. Which means they're all doing just fine.
I don't think so. Apparently most of the cast thought it wouldn't do well so I think they accepted salaries. Guinness was an exception and he negotiated himself 2% of Lucas's gross revenues :lol:
But then there's hollywood economics. Those percentage of what a film makes deals rarely work out as well as they seem on paper apparently. Lots of faulty accounting making out that blockbusters actually lost money so nobody is owed anything.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 12, 2012, 01:06:05 AM
It was Lucas who made out like a bandit, he got a huge percentage IIRC.
IIRC, he negotiated a much lower salary in exchange of merchandising rights, or something like that.
Quote from: Tyr on November 12, 2012, 04:16:41 AM
But then there's hollywood economics. Those percentage of what a film makes deals rarely work out as well as they seem on paper apparently. Lots of faulty accounting making out that blockbusters actually lost money so nobody is owed anything.
That's oh so true, I remember when Sony tried to make it look like Spiderman didn't have profits so they didn't have to pay royalties to Stan Lee...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2458083.stm
Quote from: Syt on November 12, 2012, 03:25:43 AM
Carrie Fisher did a lot of work as a script doctor in Hollywood. Not sure if this earns you much any money, though.
It does. Not millions, but easily 500$ for an afternoon's work. And you can get way more than that if your reputation is good enough. I had a writing teacher in film school that proudly claimed to never have written a script in his life, yet making 5000$+ every month on script consultancy.
What an absolute tosser he was, his classes were always packed though.
Quote from: The Larch on November 12, 2012, 04:40:03 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 12, 2012, 01:06:05 AM
It was Lucas who made out like a bandit, he got a huge percentage IIRC.
IIRC, he negotiated a much lower salary in exchange of merchandising rights, or something like that.
Yeah, nobody thought there was that much money in this "merchandising" thing back in the 70s so Fox was all "Toys? Yeah, you can have that".
Quote from: celedhring on November 12, 2012, 04:49:29 AM
Quote from: The Larch on November 12, 2012, 04:40:03 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 12, 2012, 01:06:05 AM
It was Lucas who made out like a bandit, he got a huge percentage IIRC.
IIRC, he negotiated a much lower salary in exchange of merchandising rights, or something like that.
Yeah, nobody thought there was that much money in this "merchandising" thing back in the 70s so Fox was all "Toys? Yeah, you can have that".
And we all know how that turned out. :lol:
IIRC that was the main reason why Star Wars was the first film with such a massive merchandising campaign, because Lucas was directly behind that.
Darth Vader will return in the new film: http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=26648&count=0
And apparently Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher (and probably Harrison Ford) will play aged versions of their characters.
Can't tell if :bleeding: or :w00t:
Hamill better go on a diet.
I figured Harrison Ford wouldn't want to come back. He never cared much for Star Wars or playing Han Solo.
:yuk:
I hope they shit all over that stupid Expanded Universe bullshit though.
Mark Hamill can afford non expired tuna now.
Quote from: Solmyr on November 13, 2012, 05:24:02 PM
Darth Vader will return in the new film: http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=26648&count=0
And apparently Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher (and probably Harrison Ford) will play aged versions of their characters.
Can't tell if :bleeding: or :w00t:
It all links back to "unnamed sources" by express.co.uk.
I can see their point - he's an iconic figure, it's Star Wars (so nothing's impossible), but what little meaning the prequels had was to set up the 6 movies as being about the rise, fall, and ultimate redemption of Anakin.
Bringing him back from the dead shits all over that.
But hell - it's Star Wars. Maybe it's some new guy who dons the black helmet...
The prequels deserve to be shat upon.
Quote from: The Larch on November 13, 2012, 05:49:14 PM
The prequels deserve to be shat upon.
I'll shit on Natalie Portman.
Gross, dude.
DID I SAY THAT OUT LOUD?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 12, 2012, 12:39:39 AM
Mark Hamil must make decent money as the voice actor for the Joker.
Not anymore. He retired from the character after Arkham City. Of course, he's probably still pulling in paychecks from the gig, since people are still buying lots of copies of Return of the Joker. :P
Quote from: FunkMonk on November 13, 2012, 07:09:31 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 13, 2012, 05:52:41 PM
Quote from: The Larch on November 13, 2012, 05:49:14 PM
The prequels deserve to be shat upon.
I'll shit on Natalie Portman.
:mad:
First, I'd take her clothes off,sit her in the bathtub and then piss on her face. After that, she can take a shower.
Then I would fuck her in the ass. Then the vagina. Then her mouth.
Finally, I'd roll her out of my car with a crisp new 20dollar bill.
You can do all that from your zimmer frame?
Quote from: Razgovory on November 13, 2012, 07:37:35 PM
You can do all that from your zimmer frame?
I have a Harkonnen hover device.
Anyway, the most important part of Vader was James Earl Jones.
Quote from: garbon on November 13, 2012, 07:42:24 PM
Anyway, the most important part of Vader was James Earl Jones.
racist
WTF, Ed!
Way more than I needed to know.
:lol:
I have to feed my fans.
It's being reported that Harrison Ford will return as Han Solo! :w00t:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/02/15/harrison_ford_will_reportedly_return_as_han_solo_in_star_wars_episode_vii.html
Also talk of stand alone Solo origin story.
First, I'd sit Harrison Ford in my bathtub and piss on him.....
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 15, 2013, 07:44:34 PM
First, I'd sit Harrison Ford in my bathtub and piss on him.....
We really don't need to hear about your sex games. :yuk:
Quote from: garbon on February 15, 2013, 07:57:12 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 15, 2013, 07:44:34 PM
First, I'd sit Harrison Ford in my bathtub and piss on him.....
We really don't need to hear about your sex games. :yuk:
I gotta be me.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 15, 2013, 07:33:19 PM
It's being reported that Harrison Ford will return as Han Solo! :w00t:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/02/15/harrison_ford_will_reportedly_return_as_han_solo_in_star_wars_episode_vii.html
Cause geriatric Indy was so awesome...
Quote from: katmai on February 15, 2013, 07:43:29 PM
Also talk of stand alone Solo origin story.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Guy would be perfect for the role.
Quote from: celedhring on November 12, 2012, 04:45:03 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 12, 2012, 04:16:41 AM
But then there's hollywood economics. Those percentage of what a film makes deals rarely work out as well as they seem on paper apparently. Lots of faulty accounting making out that blockbusters actually lost money so nobody is owed anything.
That's oh so true, I remember when Sony tried to make it look like Spiderman didn't have profits so they didn't have to pay royalties to Stan Lee...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2458083.stm
Maybe Stan Lee should've read his contract, instead of Jack Kirbying up the joint.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 13, 2012, 07:34:39 PMThen I would fuck her in the ass. Then the vagina.
I've heard that's am easy way to get an infection.
Better yet, Stan Lee should have commanded all his fans to kill all lawyers, and the problem would work itself out.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 15, 2013, 11:23:12 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 13, 2012, 07:34:39 PMThen I would fuck her in the ass. Then the vagina.
I've heard that's am easy way to get an infection.
Not my concern. I'm wearing a rubber and she is thrown in a dumpster after I'm done.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on February 15, 2013, 08:17:26 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 15, 2013, 07:33:19 PM
It's being reported that Harrison Ford will return as Han Solo! :w00t:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/02/15/harrison_ford_will_reportedly_return_as_han_solo_in_star_wars_episode_vii.html
Cause geriatric Indy was so awesome...
I don't think Ford's acting was the problem with that movie.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 16, 2013, 07:20:17 AMI don't think Ford's acting was the problem with that movie.
No, his being too old for the role was.
And fat.
They could maybe do a tv show, though: The Young Han Solo Chronicles. And yes, I'd watch that. :P
Quote from: Syt on February 16, 2013, 07:28:36 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 16, 2013, 07:20:17 AMI don't think Ford's acting was the problem with that movie.
No, his being too old for the role was.
But the whole point was that he was old. It was a generational film. Was there anything he did in Raiders that he couldn't have done in Crystal Skull? I don't put any of Crystal Skull's problems on Ford.
http://starwars.com/news/star-wars-episode-7-cast-announced.html
Episode VII cast announced:
QuoteActors John Boyega, Daisy Ridley, Adam Driver, Oscar Isaac, Andy Serkis, Domhnall Gleeson, and Max von Sydow will join the original stars of the saga, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew, and Kenny Baker in the new film.
:unsure:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstarwars.com%2Fimg%2Fnews%2Fstar-wars-episode-7-cast-announce.jpg&hash=0431d8c2fe533c4f0fb954ceaf5c108c20d7acac)
Lawrence Kasdan is writing it? Oh that's the best news I've seen about this so far.
I do not know who these people are.
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2014, 01:34:08 PM
I do not know who these people are.
QuoteMax von Sydow
:huh:
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2014, 01:34:08 PM
I do not know who these people are.
Surely you know Andy Serkis and Max von Sydow.
Who is Max von Sydow playing? Obiwan Kenobi reincarnated?
People who will be hamstrung as Star Wars characters for the rest of their careers. It looks like Chewie is in it since Meyhew is in that circle.
Quote from: Zanza on April 29, 2014, 01:40:47 PM
Who is Max von Sydow playing? Obiwan Kenobi reincarnated?
I'd buy Max von Sydow as an Sith Lord.
All hail Emperor Gnim.
Von Sidow *has* to play a baddie. He's a poor man's Christopher Lee anyway, and Lee has already been in Star Wars and killed off. :lol:
I'm betting Andy Serkis' character will be completely CGI.
I hope they get John Williams for the soundtrack.
Quote from: Barrister on April 29, 2014, 01:40:39 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2014, 01:34:08 PM
I do not know who these people are.
Surely you know Andy Serkis and Max von Sydow.
Not by name, no.
I googled those 2. I recognize Serkis but not Sydow.
Quote from: Zanza on April 29, 2014, 01:40:47 PM
Who is Max von Sydow playing? Obiwan Kenobi reincarnated?
Ming, of course. "I like to play with Jedis a while... BEFORE ANNIHILATION!!!!!"
I prefer 'young, coke-whore / slave girl' Carrie Fisher to 'middle aged' Carrie Fisher. :hmm:
Quote from: Malthus on April 29, 2014, 02:14:34 PM
I prefer 'young, coke-whore / slave girl' Carrie Fisher to 'middle aged' Carrie Fisher. :hmm:
Andrea Dworkin's ghost is coming for you. :(
She declined a lot even between Episodes 4 and 6. I'm guessing she was a party pro back then. Rich kid. Debbie Reynolds' daughter.
Quote from: Caliga on April 29, 2014, 02:17:36 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 29, 2014, 02:14:34 PM
I prefer 'young, coke-whore / slave girl' Carrie Fisher to 'middle aged' Carrie Fisher. :hmm:
Andrea Dworkin's ghost is coming for you. :(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dworkin_on_After_Dark.JPG
I can't fap to that. :(
Dworkin really is one of those that gave feminism the bad name as a descriptor for angry man haters.
Maybe that's where my sister picked up the notion that watching porn alone while in a relationship should be considered cheating. :hmm:
Quote from: garbon on April 29, 2014, 03:06:49 PM
Dworkin really is one of those that gave feminism the bad name as a descriptor for angry man haters.
Does anyone love angry men?
I love 12 angry men. What a classic.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 29, 2014, 03:55:11 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 29, 2014, 03:06:49 PM
Dworkin really is one of those that gave feminism the bad name as a descriptor for angry man haters.
Does anyone love angry men?
People seem to like Eminem's act.
Quote from: Valmy on April 29, 2014, 03:56:18 PM
I love 12 angry men.
What, at the same time? :hmm:
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2014, 01:47:27 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 29, 2014, 01:40:39 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2014, 01:34:08 PM
I do not know who these people are.
Surely you know Andy Serkis and Max von Sydow.
Not by name, no.
I googled those 2. I recognize Serkis but not Sydow.
If nothing else, surely you recognize him from this timeless classic...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.trbimg.com%2Fimg-4f3e5029%2Fturbine%2Fla-et-strange-brew-hockeyfilm2%2F750&hash=dabdb28354dd658aae3a156621e839829e36565d)
An excellent movie. Worth watching every year or so.
Quote from: Barrister on April 29, 2014, 04:05:38 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2014, 01:47:27 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 29, 2014, 01:40:39 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2014, 01:34:08 PM
I do not know who these people are.
Surely you know Andy Serkis and Max von Sydow.
Not by name, no.
I googled those 2. I recognize Serkis but not Sydow.
If nothing else, surely you recognize him from this timeless classic...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.trbimg.com%2Fimg-4f3e5029%2Fturbine%2Fla-et-strange-brew-hockeyfilm2%2F750&hash=dabdb28354dd658aae3a156621e839829e36565d)
Nope.
DoB : 1984.
:blink:
I guess I just assumed everyone in Canada had seen Strange Brew. :(
Quote from: The Larch on April 29, 2014, 01:43:48 PM
Von Sidow *has* to play a baddie. He's a poor man's Christopher Lee anyway, and Lee has already been in Star Wars and killed off. :lol:
Did you just call
Ming the Merciless the poor man's anything? :angry:
Quote from: Ideologue on April 29, 2014, 06:38:30 PM
Quote from: The Larch on April 29, 2014, 01:43:48 PM
Von Sidow *has* to play a baddie. He's a poor man's Christopher Lee anyway, and Lee has already been in Star Wars and killed off. :lol:
Did you just call Ming the Merciless the poor man's anything? :angry:
Von Sydow has made lots and lots of crap over the years, including some dreadful Italian fantasy TV movies where he specialized in cheesy scenary chewing baddies. A poor man's Christopher Lee he is.
FLASH! AAAH-AAAH!
Quote from: The Larch on April 30, 2014, 06:30:11 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on April 29, 2014, 06:38:30 PM
Quote from: The Larch on April 29, 2014, 01:43:48 PM
Von Sidow *has* to play a baddie. He's a poor man's Christopher Lee anyway, and Lee has already been in Star Wars and killed off. :lol:
Did you just call Ming the Merciless the poor man's anything? :angry:
Von Sydow has made lots and lots of crap over the years, including some dreadful Italian fantasy TV movies where he specialized in cheesy scenary chewing baddies. A poor man's Christopher Lee he is.
Well, so did Peter Cushing when he was cast in the first one. You can't make a Star Wars film without some washed-up B-film actor playing a villain, anyway.
Saw an interview with Dave Prowse today, barely concealed rage.
Quote from: Ideologue on April 29, 2014, 06:38:30 PM
Did you just call Ming the Merciless the poor man's anything? :angry:
Seriously. Not to mention Brewmeister Smith.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 30, 2014, 08:09:29 AM
Saw an interview with Dave Prowse today, barely concealed rage.
In what sense? For not being in the cast? :huh:
Savior of the Universe! Dum-dum-dum-dum-dum-dum-dum-dum
Quote from: celedhring on April 30, 2014, 08:15:01 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 30, 2014, 08:09:29 AM
Saw an interview with Dave Prowse today, barely concealed rage.
In what sense? For not being in the cast? :huh:
I think he always felt snubbed that Lucas chose a different actor to play unmasked Vader for Return of the Jedi. And that he was never quite given proper credit for his part in creating Vader as a character.
He also didn't know about James Earl Jones being Vader's voice until he saw the film during its opening.
He even had a voice over as the Green Cross Code man:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRUBMBi_lp4
Typical institutionalised anti-West Country bias <_<
Quote from: The Larch on April 30, 2014, 06:30:11 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on April 29, 2014, 06:38:30 PM
Quote from: The Larch on April 29, 2014, 01:43:48 PM
Von Sidow *has* to play a baddie. He's a poor man's Christopher Lee anyway, and Lee has already been in Star Wars and killed off. :lol:
Did you just call Ming the Merciless the poor man's anything? :angry:
Von Sydow has made lots and lots of crap over the years, including some dreadful Italian fantasy TV movies where he specialized in cheesy scenary chewing baddies. A poor man's Christopher Lee he is.
Max von Sydow a poor man's Christopher Lee. :lol:
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 29, 2014, 01:09:23 PM
Lawrence Kasdan is writing it? Oh that's the best news I've seen about this so far.
No fucking shit. Maybe he can save it from Lucas.
Quote from: Syt on April 30, 2014, 08:32:23 AM
I think he always felt snubbed that Lucas chose a different actor to play unmasked Vader for Return of the Jedi. And that he was never quite given proper credit for his part in creating Vader as a character.
He has a point there I think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITMnUxxvMyo
:bleeding:
That's awful :lmfao:
Reminds me of Moranis' Dark Helmet.
Btw, for an alternate take on Star Wars check out "War in the Stars", a fan re-edit, using deleted scenes (the Biggs scene on Tatooine, e.g.), or alternate takes (the cantina), a synth soundtrack, and new James-Earl Jones voice track copied from other movies, creating a strong B-schlock feel.
If they had used Prowse's voice for Darth Vader then that would certainly add to Luke and Leia's relationship :perv:
Weird he wouldn't have known that they were changing the voice though. He should have realised that even if they were to use his voice they would need to rerecord it and couldn't just use his crappy muffled on set vocals.
Quote from: sbr on April 30, 2014, 06:48:58 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITMnUxxvMyo
:bleeding:
Wow. :lol:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwpmedia.arts.nationalpost.com%2F2014%2F05%2Fabrams-on-set.jpg%3Fw%3D620&hash=fc87465e8f039c8af340f417f252623ad1abe742)
I guess we now know what ET looked like when he grew up.
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2014, 06:49:51 PM
I guess we now know what ET looked like when he grew up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMW3W-G43gI
In addition to the new trilogy, Disney will release stand-alone Star Wars films in between.
http://www.cnet.com/news/godzilla-director-to-helm-first-stand-alone-star-wars/