[worry]

Eddie Redmayne might be the ugliest (famous) dude I've ever seen. Looks like a Dick Tracy villain mated with Freddy Krueger. That single bit of news makes me so much less enthused about the new movies. Not to be shallow about it, it's just a visceral repulsion.

[QuickTidal]

worry, on 02 June 2015 - 07:51 PM, said:

Eddie Redmayne might be the ugliest (famous) dude I've ever seen. Looks like a Dick Tracy villain mated with Freddy Krueger. That single bit of news makes me so much less enthused about the new movies. Not to be shallow about it, it's just a visceral repulsion.

Really? That's a truly odd view. He looks like a typical dude to me.

[worry]

He look like the skinniest California Raisin got sucked even further dry by Bunnicula.

[Tiste Simeon]

worry, on 02 June 2015 - 07:51 PM, said:

shallow view about someone's appearance

Not to be shallow about it...

FTFY

[worry]

Bout to start ragging on his mama too.

[worry]

For the record, I've never seen her, but she looks like a day-old bagel wearing Groucho glasses.

[Illuyankas]

I hear she looks like Oscar the Grouch lives in her

like a Batman villain called Too Much Face Take It Away Oh God

like a classy, esteemed and respectable lady

...wait a minute

[Slow Ben]

http://deadline.com/...ibe-1201436229/

Dark Tower movie news...again.



I will believe it, when i see it.

[Aptorian]

Just watched Limitless.

For those who haven't heard about it, it's a film about a slacker who takes a pill that makes him superhumanly intelligent and the movie is basically about what he does with his new found brilliance.

I am wandering what people thought of it, especially compared to Lucy. I saw Lucy mentioned by a few people earlier in this thread. People didn't seem to like it.

To those who haven't watched Lucy, it's a story about some druggie (at least I think she is?) who accidentally gets an overdose of a super brain drug that within days will probably kill her.

Now here's what I think, I think Limitless is a unambitious story about a brilliant person, written by a person who isn't that clever. While Lucy is a crazy story written by a person who is pretty creative.

I think Limitless was a typical example of a story, where an author tries to write an intelligent character and fails because he does not factor in his own limited intellect, nor the viewer/readers analytical capability to single out the smart guys flaws.

Lucy does this much better by throwing caution to the wind and just going all out. Lucy is the super hero sci-fi fantasy version of Limitless. Instead of trying to write the every man story about what a loser does with his windfall, it's a story about what happens when you transcend the base needs and desires of a less intelligent being.

As such Lucy was quite the ride, while I spent the whole time watching Limitless thinking, god this smart guy is dumb.

Also it helped that Luc Beson makes crazy films.

This post has been edited by Apt: 06 June 2015 - 09:35 PM

[polishgenius]

I quite liked Limitless. It didn't exactly stick in the brain, but it was good fun to watch.

I haven't seen Lucy yet.

[QuickTidal]

THE MARTIAN trailer.

Goddamn, this looks incredible.

Makes me want to read the book.

[Morgoth]

polishgenius, on 06 June 2015 - 09:38 PM, said:

I quite liked Limitless. It didn't exactly stick in the brain, but it was good fun to watch.

I haven't seen Lucy yet.

I found, like Apt (ah, the pain), that the hero of Limitless acted incredibly stupid for being this sort of sci fi level genius. Lucy, despite it's enormous selection of flaws, at least managed that aspect tolerably well. I think Understand by Ted Chiang (they should just have based the script on that story) does a much better job of portraying someone who is able to transcend human intelligence.

[QuickTidal]

Morgoth, on 08 June 2015 - 04:00 PM, said:

polishgenius, on 06 June 2015 - 09:38 PM, said:

I quite liked Limitless. It didn't exactly stick in the brain, but it was good fun to watch.

I haven't seen Lucy yet.

I found, like Apt (ah, the pain), that the hero of Limitless acted incredibly stupid for being this sort of sci fi level genius. Lucy, despite it's enormous selection of flaws, at least managed that aspect tolerably well. I think Understand by Ted Chiang (they should just have based the script on that story) does a much better job of portraying someone who is able to transcend human intelligence.

This was me too. LIMITLESS was a huge disappointment, and my wife (whose eye is FAR less discerning when it comes to movies than I) also didn't like it.

Oh, and I very nearly threw the remote at the TV when

Spoiler

Eddie licks up the dead guys blood to get a Limitless dose, and the little tiny amount of blood he laps up gives him full Limitless power.

God that was painful.

Oh, and if you are making a movie about a drug that allows you to use crazy brain potential or whatever...I get why you would be INCLINED to want to shoot it with filters so that OFF the drug everything is blue/gray and miserable, and everything ON the drug is bright and yellow/orange and lovely...but goddammit DON'T do that. As a viewer/audience, the point this makes to me is that MY life must be friggin miserable and gray and dreary because I'm not on some magic drug that makes me Brainy Smurf DeGrasse Tyson. That was PROBABLY the stupidest thing about the film and the worst choice the director made, trumping even the story points that bugged me, don't make your cinematography talk DOWN to me as the viewer. I don't want that. THE GAME manages to pull off the whole "Your life is better when..." aspect without Fincher having felt the need to fall back on a crutch like filters to get a point across. Audiences aren't stupid, let them do the work for the story ideals, not the celluloid.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 08 June 2015 - 04:22 PM

[Blend]

Anyone seen Kingsman? I watched it recently and thoroughly enjoyed it. Highly recommended for anyone who enjoys spy movies with a few shakers of salt. There were some moments in there that were absolute gold!

[QuickTidal]

Blend, on 08 June 2015 - 06:22 PM, said:

Anyone seen Kingsman? I watched it recently and thoroughly enjoyed it. Highly recommended for anyone who enjoys spy movies with a few shakers of salt. There were some moments in there that were absolute gold!

Great flick. Saw it in theatres. Someone (I think PG) referred to it as an homage to Roger Moore era Bond movies...and that's actually really apt. Since I grew up during the Moore Bond era I identified with that type of spy flick with all the goofiness, womanizing, and ridiculous villains.

[polishgenius]

QuickTidal, on 08 June 2015 - 06:49 PM, said:

Someone (I think PG) referred to it as an homage to Roger Moore era Bond movies...and that's actually really apt.

Well it wasn't me in so many words. Because iirc I've not seen a Roger Moore Bond movie , or at least not for aaaaaaaaages. But I might have said 'old-school Bond'.




Speaking of spy comedy-action films, I saw Spy today. I'm not normally a fan of Melissa McCarthy and the trailers looked pretty average but I went on the strength of good reviews and was not disappointed. It keeps the sad-sack/cringe stuff reigned in to tolerable levels and instead has a lot of legit(but funny) badassery. Plus Jason Statham is just hysterical.


Man, there's a lot of spy films this year. Already had this and Kingsman, and to an extent Fast 7, and have Bond, Mission: Impossible and Man from UNCLE on the way. Any I've missed?


Also, for some reason, loads of boxing films - although some might not get a US/UK release till next year, I guess.

This post has been edited by polishgenius: 08 June 2015 - 07:11 PM

[Tiste Simeon]

QuickTidal, on 08 June 2015 - 04:21 PM, said:

Morgoth, on 08 June 2015 - 04:00 PM, said:

polishgenius, on 06 June 2015 - 09:38 PM, said:

I quite liked Limitless. It didn't exactly stick in the brain, but it was good fun to watch.

I haven't seen Lucy yet.

I found, like Apt (ah, the pain), that the hero of Limitless acted incredibly stupid for being this sort of sci fi level genius. Lucy, despite it's enormous selection of flaws, at least managed that aspect tolerably well. I think Understand by Ted Chiang (they should just have based the script on that story) does a much better job of portraying someone who is able to transcend human intelligence.

This was me too. LIMITLESS was a huge disappointment, and my wife (whose eye is FAR less discerning when it comes to movies than I) also didn't like it.

Oh, and I very nearly threw the remote at the TV when

Spoiler

Eddie licks up the dead guys blood to get a Limitless dose, and the little tiny amount of blood he laps up gives him full Limitless power.

God that was painful.

Oh, and if you are making a movie about a drug that allows you to use crazy brain potential or whatever...I get why you would be INCLINED to want to shoot it with filters so that OFF the drug everything is blue/gray and miserable, and everything ON the drug is bright and yellow/orange and lovely...but goddammit DON'T do that. As a viewer/audience, the point this makes to me is that MY life must be friggin miserable and gray and dreary because I'm not on some magic drug that makes me Brainy Smurf DeGrasse Tyson. That was PROBABLY the stupidest thing about the film and the worst choice the director made, trumping even the story points that bugged me, don't make your cinematography talk DOWN to me as the viewer. I don't want that. THE GAME manages to pull off the whole "Your life is better when..." aspect without Fincher having felt the need to fall back on a crutch like filters to get a point across. Audiences aren't stupid, let them do the work for the story ideals, not the celluloid.

The thing that annoyed me about that film was "If you're that clever why not work out how to make more of the drug?"

[Morgoth]

Or, if you're so clever why don't you notice that you're getting low on the drug before you're all out?

[champ]

They're actually making a TV show based on the film too with Bradley Cooper making guest appearences...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4422836/

[Aptorian]

Tiste Simeon, on 08 June 2015 - 10:23 PM, said:

The thing that annoyed me about that film was "If you're that clever why not work out how to make more of the drug?"

Spoiler

The thing about that one, was that he was trying to do that. He hired at least one laboratory to find out how the drug works. The problem was that the compounds were easily identifiable but the delivery system into the neurons would take years to figure out.

Not being a laboratory nerd I am assuming that this was a problem that he couldn't just analyze and solve, but rather it had to be brute forced by simply running a million tests. At the time he promised the guy 2 million if he could do it in 6 months.

Morgoth, on 09 June 2015 - 05:27 AM, said:

Or, if you're so clever why don't you notice that you're getting low on the drug before you're all out?

Spoiler

That was actually a weird one. They never fully explain how much he has of the stuff. The package was about the size of a brick. And every time he moves the package it never seems to shrink. So did he have enough for years? The deadline he gave the laboratory geek was 6 months so that may have been the amount he had left.

But seriously, you'd also think that a 4 digit IQ would mean you not only would find smarter hiding places than your jacket pocket and that you would be able to track down the developers.

champ, on 09 June 2015 - 08:03 AM, said:

They're actually making a TV show based on the film too with Bradley Cooper making guest appearences...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4422836/

I feel like there's already been a bunch of these shows. Wasn't there one a couple years ago about a guy with a chip in his head? And another one with some guy who had brain surgery or something?

This post has been edited by Apt: 09 June 2015 - 08:50 AM