[SylvanShade]

yuna_anomander25, on 28 May 2012 - 10:54 AM, said:

can i expect something malazan-esque in the books or even if just a little, cause that's how mostly i feel towards SE's books, it was as you said gut punchers, now you're upping my excitement,
mostly because i prefer to take the risk but if someone recommends a series, i'm really grateful and appreciative, and discover what is it about this series for them to recommend it,
thanks,

I read Hunger Games and it is in no way similar to Malazan...
Sure the movie was entertaining, but the book is just another young adult novel whos author thinks labeling it Dystopian fiction makes it more intellectual. Hunger Games is a guilty pleasure if anything.

As to the topic, I am hoping to watch Elena soon.

[QuickTidal]

Yeah, you can't compare Malazan to Hunger Games. The writing is totally different. Both are good, but for wholly different reasons.

[QuickTidal]

New Takeshi Kitano flick, a sequel to the Yakuza film OUTRAGE called...wait for it....OUTRAGE BEYOND.

I fucking adore Kitano's films. Ever since seeing stuff like BROTHER and KIKUJIRO at the Film Fest I've been a big fan.

Oh and if you haven't seen a Kitano flick and know not of what I speak. BROTHER. Rent it. See it. He's made a LOT of films, but that one is a great entry into his stuff.

[Aptorian]

After watching the Deathly Hallows part 1 and 2 with a friend (My god those films were slow), we decided to rewatch the first one to make a comparison of how much the movies changed. And I discovered an easter egg from the ending of the last movie. In the first film Harry and Ron buy a ton of candy, among the things a chocolate frog that comes to life, crawls up the window and jumps out. In the ending, when the new kids heading for Hogwartz are sitting in their compartment, you see a chocolate frog spring up onto the window and jump out before the train leaves.

I don't know why but I thought that was an amazing storyloop.

This post has been edited by Aptorius: 29 May 2012 - 07:57 PM

[HoosierDaddy]

Deathly Hallows Part 2 was slow?

I guess warp-speed is your plot of choice?

[QuickTidal]

HDiddy, on 29 May 2012 - 10:03 PM, said:

Deathly Hallows Part 2 was slow?

I guess warp-speed is your plot of choice?

Yeah, this may be another "Apt has fucked up movie notions compared to the rest of the planet"....because Deathly Hallows PII is damn near ALL battle. LOL. It's everything BUT slow.

I'm also amused he had to re-watch the first movie to get the chocolate frog reference.

[Aptorian]

Maybe it was my experience with part 1 that tainted my impression of part 2 but it just seemed to drag along. I think those two films would have benefited from some heavy editing of the middle part. But then again, the same can be said for the book it self.

[SylvanShade]

I thought part 1 was rather slow. In fact I haven't seen the second part yet, so maybe my opinion is moot...

[worry]

I preferred Part 1 to Part 2, and enjoyed the leisurely pace which was so unlike nearly every other entry in the series.

[QuickTidal]

worrywort, on 30 May 2012 - 05:50 AM, said:

I preferred Part 1 to Part 2, and enjoyed the leisurely pace which was so unlike nearly every other entry in the series.

Yeah, a lot of people get down on the "camping in the woods" section in both the book and the film...but it does actually serve a few character building purposes, and I liked it for that. I'm on side with WW for that.

That said, I will usually watch the two films in one go on BluRay and get the whole experience as one.

[amphibian]

I've not watched a full Harry Potter movie since the third one. Saw scattered bits of the fourth and then ceased all future efforts towards that effect.

[yuna_anomander25]

the movies i watched this past few days:

the help - a real tear-jerker, i LOL'd at this part:

Spoiler

the pie, eat my shit

@QuickTidal - yah, it deserves praise, so glad i picked it up,

chloe - about having an affair or not, pretty complicated situation there
jennifer's body - don't really understand what's good about megan fox, sure has a nice bod, but other than that, nothing,

the movies i picked up:
the three musketeers - milla jovovich, nuff said
faces in the crowd - again, will watch this later

about the hunger games - picked up book 1, already started, this was told in 1st person POV, that i wasn't used to,
um, not really comparing this to malazan, i'm just curious if i could get the same vibe i had with the books, but as i'm reading it, i now know it won't but
it's still good, it's keeping me interested, will pick up books 2 and 3 when it comes up in paperback, so that i will have it all in one type,

[QuickTidal]

yuna_anomander25, on 30 May 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

about the hunger games - picked up book 1, already started, this was told in 1st person POV, that i wasn't used to,

Yeah, it's written in 1st person present tense...which is a tough thing for an author to do when the natural reaction would be to slip into 3rd person past tense.

[worry]

I think maybe I'm the only one who liked Jennifer's Body more than Juno. And I liked Juno fine, more or less, terrible pregnancy test/Rainn Wilson scene notwithstanding.

[yuna_anomander25]

worrywort, on 30 May 2012 - 10:56 PM, said:

I think maybe I'm the only one who liked Jennifer's Body more than Juno. And I liked Juno fine, more or less, terrible pregnancy test/Rainn Wilson scene notwithstanding.

well, JB is ok, i guess, i actually liked the ending, its just that i don't know what's so special about megan fox, aside from having a super bod, i like amanda seyfried more,

[worry]

Everyone is special.

[yuna_anomander25]

worrywort, on 31 May 2012 - 12:37 AM, said:

Everyone is special.

it's ok, i'm not demeaning Megan Fox intentionally, sorry if that came out wrong,

just watched the three musketeers, my thoughts:

i still like the sutherland-sheen-o'donnel one, porthos in this one isn't much lively, aramis isn't much of a playboy, hehe, well, athos is still athos, whoever plays him, he's my favorite musketeer,
at first glance i thought orlando bloom played dual roles, aramis and buckingham, then i saw he's only buckingham, though they looked alike,
milla is quite good as milady/countess de winter - esp w/ those resident evil type of stunts,
the one who played constance, she's pretty and easy on the eyes, more beautiful than the queen,

i could see they're catering to younger audience/generation with those deviating elements in the film but it's ok, i guess,
looks like there will be a sequel? as the movie isnt likely to be finished or is it?

[Morgoth]

Watched MIB 3 this week-end.

I enjoyed it. The feel is more in sync with the first rather than the second, which is good. Alas, the plot was nonsensical at best and about as coherent as a drunk lawyer playing mafia. In addition, I found the main villain to be rather underwhelming. Cool intro, but in the end he was more fittet to the role of muscle for a real villain, rather than being the main bad himself.

[QuickTidal]

Saw SNOW WHITE & THE HUNTSMAN this morning.

and it was...

AMAZING.

Like easily the 2nd best movie I've seen this year after AVENGERS.

It treats the source material with drama and has a serious tone throughout. A well written script, and incredibly well acted parts.

Kristen Stewart gets a raw deal from her TWILIGHT stuff, but here she did a very admirable job and even an admirable accent.

Oh and she looks hot as hell in armor.

Just saying. I think I might have swooned a few times. She looked YUMMY.

A great film, with a great soundtrack as well...and the dwarves are a who's who of awesome actors (and I think they were achieved the same way the Hobbits and dwarves in the LOTR films) were. They looked great.

Just incredibly realized throughout and i want to see it again!

Oh and the soundtrack was so good that I bought it from iTunes as I sat in the theatre as the credits rolled. James Newton Howard outdid himself.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 02 June 2012 - 06:03 PM

[Traveller]

I'm watching 'The Return of the King.'

My god, did these films always look this.. fake? Or are they aging already? Minas Tirith and Helms Deep look like airbrushed polystyrene, and everything done using a bluescreen looks, well, like it was done with a blue/green screen.

Don't get me wrong, I love these films, but seriously, city walls do not fall into individual brick shapes when hit with stone projectiles. And how the hell are the Gondorian soldiers managing to load whole sections of brick wall into trebuchets mounted on the top tiers of the city? And..no cavalry would ever charge at a load of archers hidden behind stone defences, even if their leader did have a death wish.

Sorry, sounds like I'm picking, but watching this makes me realise that I really wouldn't mind seeing a new, alternative version. With sections like Aragorn summoning the dead army done as they were written, without all the made-up stuff. 'You and whose army?' Really?

(Also, I quite liked the look of the Gollum that appears briefly in the first film, rather than the one that turns up in 'The Two Towers.. damn, I should go now, I'll be complaining about the Orcs that have been eating 'bread for days' next, instead of strips of meat of a dubious origin..)

EDIT ..and now the battlefield is overrun by rivers of green men that swarm all over everything. I suppose it's because when I think of the books, all the bits that really stuck in my head have been cut from the films. And all the additional material seems... weird, and unecessary. Like turning the Dark Lord Maia Sauron, into... a lighthouse.

This post has been edited by Traveller: 02 June 2012 - 09:13 PM