ThunderPeel2001

I've just been hanging out with the girl from the flat above me, who I quite like. Wootio. Is it just me, or is reading pain and gloom more interesting?

I'm probably not going to be able to make it until 9, I imagine. I hope everyone will be there and not so drunk they don't know who I am.

With the constant barrage of entertainment available at our fingertips, it's sad that it takes precedence over other, probably more worthwhile experiences. Note to self: Must be more like Nachimir! On another note: Just bought my ticket to LA.

It's hard, but try and keep your eyes on the drummer... fj1LIkh56WA

It does actually. How very astute!

That's because NOBODY'S life is pretty awesome... ...or maybe it's just more fun to share problems Actually, I DO have some nice news: I'm planning another trip to LA. It may well break the bank, but with I a bit of careful planning, I think I can do it! How much spending money would you require for two weeks, do you think? (I wish I'd kept a record, last time.)

Some animated tumbleweeds, perhaps?

Be prepared to make Justin Bieber jokes this time around... damn pipsqueak stole my hair!

OMG. So funny! Cracked can be great.

Zoidberg works better, but he's still not much of a character. I'm not sure The Simpsons should have even been The Simpsons after season 7

We have also met. Do you remember that? (I think you were a tad drunk.) You said I was "more emo" than you were expecting. Like if someone was putting together a face at the beginning of Oblivion, they tweaked the "emo" dial a bit.

SPACECAMP!!!

You misunderstood me, I think the idea of Reavers is scary... but the implementation of them in Serenity was not. I wasn't talking about how they "look" at all, I was more meaning that the audience has to believe that "these guys are fucking scary threat!" -- except they weren't. All our protagonists had guns, for example. It would have been good if we'd seen one of the townsfolk with a gun, get totally slaughtered none-the-less. We never saw the Reavers actually do anything, attack anyone, eat anyone, kill anyone. They just sort of stood there. As an audience member I was all ready to buy into them being something to be scared of, but they never actually did anything. At least in the series they had Zoe's description: "If they take the ship, they'll rape us to death, eat our flesh and sew our skins into their clothing, and if we're very, very lucky... they'll do it in that order." Of course they couldn't have literally shown that stuff, but they could have hinted at it, and made the audience scared enough about the idea of meeting one down a dark alley (in the way zombies are scary). That would have made the later scenes that much more tense. So yeah, I totally agree that the concept could have been scary, it was just the execution, that was not. Edit: Thinking about it, weren't the tribal people in Jackson's King Kong damned scary? (I seem to recall at least one jump moment.)

Ooh, ooh, I know! Rashomon was the first ever film to present the camera as an unreliable narrator. It kind of blew people's minds when they first saw it, and it was also the first Japanese film to become big in the West (which opened the door to us all appreciating Kurosawa's later works). The film itself obviously doesn't have anywhere near the impact as it once did (a lying camera is a staple of narrative tools, these days), and as such, I think it's fair to say that it's aged badly. Which isn't to say that it isn't good, it's just more historically interesting than artistically (IMO). You're right to notice some of the fancy camera work, too. Some people claim it was the first film to ever point the camera into the sky and show light coming through the trees, for example. It also harks back to the age of silent movies, too, with long scenes being played out with no dialogue, and broad expressive acting (which was unusual for the time). It's interesting that this throwback to the "silent era" was something Sunset Blvd. did (in a different way) that very same year. People (I think) were beginning to look back over cinema, and were getting a bit nostalgic/beginning to re-asses those days and film itself in the early 50s. All About Eve questioned the idea of celebrity the same year, and a few years later, Singing in the Rain was set during the silent era (just as "talkies" were taking off). I find it quite interesting! As for what I've been watching: I saw The Seventh Seal recently. It was made around the same time as the films above. It's very strange... it has a narrative, but it's also incredibly artistic -- although not in the way you might imagine. I felt it wasn't so much a proper film, as a work of art, which was rather strange considering how ugly it was in places. Last night I saw Greenberg, which I sort of hated and then, as it sunk in over the course of today, I found myself appreciating more. Quite touching and profound, in a way, if you can get past how much of a selfish, unlikeable twat, Greenberg is.

Interesting to read your thoughts, thanks for sharing them. There were major changes in the relationship between some of the characters (especially Doc and Mal, as you pointed out). It was a little jarring at first, but I found myself preferring this version of Mal (actually the original, hardened version from the pilot episode). Fox put pressure on Whedon and co to lighten the tone of Firefly, so Mal became a lot more cuddly pretty quickly, but I always found his "destroyed man" character to be infinitely more interesting. (Kind of like John Wayne's character in The Searchers -- but better.) The first thing that really struck me, though, was just how fricking amazingly awesome the opening 10 minutes were. I just got goosebumps at how wonderful it was (with the music swelling in the final moments). I was blown away. Sadly things started to go downhill after that. I hadn't seen it in 5 years either, but with the series fresh in my head, and sort of knowing what to expect, I could view it more objectively this time around. The came to the conclusion that the biggest problem in the entire film was the first action sequence with The Reavers. They just weren't scary. At all. The moment they appeared on screen should have been shocking and unsettling in the extreme. It should have made people's adrenaline pump, squirm in their seats and created a genuine bogey-man to haunt the rest of the film. This would have paid dividends later on in the film, and also made the first chase sequence actually interesting, instead of a podrace. Whedon tried to made the audience feel this terror by making all the character's totally scared at the thought of them -- but this can only ever work if the audience is already on the edge of their seat... but the Reaver attack took place in broad daylight, in the middle of an amusing scene. The Reavers were, essentially just stuntmen in bad costumes... it was so terribly lame. There's the great character moment when one of the villagers runs after our escaping protagonists (where Mal, you know...), begging to be taken with them, but it really says something that I wasn't entirely sure if it was because his town was under attack, or because he just hated his boring life. Really not good. There's other problems I have with the film, too (the crappy sets, the poor cinematography -- it really did look like a TV show, and not a "movie", etc.) but on the whole I loved it. I wish it had been more of a success, I'd love to be able to spend more time with those characters and in that universe (are you paying attention, BioWare?!). But for a reason why it failed where Star Wars once succeeded, I really think the lack of threat in guise of the Reavers made the later pay offs not all that exciting for the average cinema goer. That and the fact that the final triumph wasn't for the characters themselves, but for some unknown entity (the people of the 'verse) -- and we never felt any joy at the end (because there wasn't any, I guess). I could write more, but I think that's more than enough Loved the film overall, but objectively the biggest problem I had was the complete lack of threat... something that could have so easily been fixed.

The thing that always got me about Futurama (and I LOVE the original series) was that the first episode was nothing like the others... The tone of it reminded me of Groening's "Life In Hell" strip, which I also loved. But after that, it totally changed into something else (Suicide Booths were nowhere to be seen, for one thing). In episode two they introduced the peripheral characters, but they were (and still are) very two dimensional: Amy was a rich kid who slips on stuff. Hermes was the bureaucratic Rastafarian (sounds better on paper). And Zoidberg was the world's worst doctor. The central four characters were much more interesting, it made me wonder why they tied themselves to four other characters, when they could have left it open for ones they were going to discover (like Brannigan and Kif). This worked well for The Simpsons, I'm surprised they didn't try the same formula. Just random thoughts I've had about Futurama over the years... Feel free to ignore

Too far... Oh wait! No it isn't. Woot!

Be amazed at American ingenuity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biggest_ball_of_twine There's tons of these weird things all across America. They're usually near campgrounds where families spent their summer vacation. When I was in Wisconsin Dells ("Where Nature and Fun Collide!™" aka "The Waterpark Capital of The World!®") I was amazed at how many "museums" there were that were filled with junk like this. Also at how many incredible claims there were to both American achievements and to Wisconsin Dell's own achievements (apparently the world's first shutter camera was invented there -- something I still don't know if to take seriously).

After those "feature length" episodes, I'm not that fussed anymore I couldn't make it through any of the ones I saw.

Street Fighter? :-P Seriously though, that sucks. I was quite interested in this game, but bad game mechanics blow. Maybe there's a cheat mode?

Wow. If people are only judging this from what's written in this thread, then I'm amazed it's garnered such a strong reaction. I'm also completely ignorant to Scott Pilgrim... I think I might pick the comic up though, just to see why it's so popular. I think SIN's description is enough to convince me that there's something of merit to be found in its pages. (And, for me at least, From Hell taught me you can't judge a comic by your first impressions of its artwork.) : SIN: "I dunno, the synopsis might sound awful, but it really is quite good. It's funny, well-written, and, I dunno, honest. It references video games, but not in a forced or obscure manner. It's definitely not about stupid Family-Guy-esque obscure references. And it isn't about the negative stereotype of nerds and gamers, it's about celebrating it. It's basically a coming-of-age story wrapped around a cultural context we've lived through and can relate to. You may be passed that stage of your life, I know I am, but that's beside the point." I'm not really interested in the movie, though.

Well I went from thinking the "game" totally sucked balls -- then I waited a little longer and *eventually* the screen went white and showed me the point of it. Then I was quite moved and liked it a lot.

Case and point!

Fuck me. That robot on page one is SCARY. No sir, I don't like it!

Popular things tend to draw lots of hate. I posted about how TellTale should do a Firefly game on their forums... but I wasn't prepared for the amount of Whedon hate that spewed forth. I think people just have it bottled up and don't have any outlet!