|Posted on November 11, 2013 at 5:45 AM|
And they kind of do, especially the Toy Story-Shining connection. I've seen that movie a dozen times and never noticed because you never think that anybody would put in that many references about a horror movie in a kids flick.
Don't hit "C"
Being pretty in to horror movies by the time 32X came out, I really wanted it. Really, really wanted it.
Glad I never did.
A great piece on The Last Action Hero. I know, you'd never think anyone would say that. I remember going to the theater and seeing this and not really digging it even at the age of 13. It's not a good movie, but it's an entertaining one. The only thing I can say consistently takes me out of the film on rematch is Austin O'Brien who plays the kid Danny. I like the take here: that because there were "no rules" the film caused people to not feel comfortable while watching it.
I remember feeling just that back in 93. Nothing felt "settled" or "right" and I could never get in to it. Years later when I was older, I looked at it again…and I really enjoyed it because I approached it differently and knew and learned more about film. The exact opposite happened with, say Waterworld. I really liked it when I saw it, then grew up, learned a lot about making movies and whatnot, then revisited and saw just how unsound it is on a script level and a technical level in how it was executed. Sure, the world was cool, but it had nothing to explore in it.
It's another one of those Cracked articles that thinks it's clever when, in reality, the people writing it have no idea what they're talking about because they didn't pay attention to the movie. You know, like that horrible "Plot Hole" article earlier this year that I tore about.
Also, if you can't conclusively retort what was in the movie and just ask more questions, then you aren't making a point at all.
#5 - I can maybe understand missing it, there's a lot of talking in Django Unchained, but there's an entire conversation about this very thing. I mean, I would just write it out, but it's clearly stated in the movie that Candy fancies himself a "gentleman" and you have to approach him differently, not just say "hey, here's some money." He's the type of person that wants what other people want and isn't keen on parting with something if he knows you want it really, really badly. Plus the writer is assuming a helluva lot, and also neglecting the fact that Schultz and Django have a brotherhood at this point and the notion of him not joining Schults is out of the question. I mean…you're asking to change everything to where it's not what it is anymore.
Look, there's this old saying. If stories across the board did thing simply, they wouldn't be stories.
#4 - Again, I can maybe understand it because the Pirates movies are convoluted as hell. Jones is a tragic character, and if you paid attention to the movies you'd know he put it on land because he and the sea were one and he didn't want it to be so easily obtainable to him.
The problem here is that the movies just didn't say things outright. I think this story was told in a flashback within a flashback…or something.
#3 - Now that's a plot hole and utterly stupid. Oversight if there ever was one.
#2 - Ok, here's the thing. If you're going to try and poke holes in to anything time-travel related, just stop. It's all theoretical and nobody is right.
#1 - You know why…you just aren't saying it. You're writing this just to get some hits. Silva had shown that he has men in all areas of the government and can do just about anything. Bond doesn't know who to trust and feels that even MI-6 might be compromised (now if you want to talk about loose ends, that might be a different story, but that's not the point here, is it?). That's why he went "old school" - the entire point of the final showdown and it was perfectly explained.
Certainly an overlooked gem. It has some issues, and Lazenby doesn't have the gravitas to really play the role, but the story and the action is fantastic.
T-Shirt of the Week
Easily one of the best Laurel and Hardy features. I personally like their shorter movies more, but in terms of features, this one is up there with Bonnie Scotland and The Flying Deuces. Those two in the 1930s were what Keaton and Chaplin were in the 20s (and Chaplin the 30s, I suppose).
No, not what you're thinking. He likes using that term and has in a lot of his movies. It's interesting when it's all put together in to one super cut like this.
Pretty freakin awesome. I don't use Explorer myself, but I think it's still the most used browser in the world.
I've never been 100% satisfied with a browser, by the way. I used Firefox for a while, but that's such a dang bloated piece of software, and Flash crashes on it for some reason (after numerous reinstalls mind you). Chrome seems pretty stable and generally faster (especially for multiple tab use), but some sites load incorrectly and look weird. It handles video the best, though. Loads quickly, seems smooth relatively speaking for browser videos…some sites won't let me edit comments/message board posts for some reason…
Yeah, the whole "which is better" argument to me is pointless. I switch between two way too much to say one is better than the other.
A better article than most because the writer freely admits that even the animus aren't original. The problem I have with people calling things "ripoffs!" is that they often assume that whatever is being "ripped off" is the origins of the tropes and plot used, when usually you can trace it back hundreds, sometimes even a few thousand, years. Nobody is every right, and you'll see proof of that in the comments.
When they aren't being awful and snark (Cracked) I like these articles.
This guy is on a roll, and I would say this is his best video. It's certainly his most creative and it's incredibly funny. (note: you'll need to know something about videogames to enjoy).
A belated Halloween video and about a game that I think I better hunt down. Like now. It just looks incredible. I think I've seen videos and stuff on it in the past, but Pat just has great enthusiasm and it's hard not to say "I want one!"
Just do it. It's fantastic. I think they're adding more.
Gorgeous. Click the link for more.
And so is this one.
I kind of agree with him here, but my distaste for the word is, and this is the result of misrepresentation and misuse in the media, more to the element that people assume that "Femininity" is equal to "Feminism." In other words "You gotta be a girl to be a feminist." Well, you don't, but most don't know that. Most probably don't even know what "Feminism" or "Feminist" is in the first place, but because of the "Fem" part they assume it's just something that women do and care about when it's actually just as much about men as it is women.
Is it too late to educate people on that? I don't know. Maybe we need to just start saying "Gender equality" but even then you have media wing nuts associating that with just "some women's lib thing" or something.
Oh, and his equating "Generdist" to "Racist" is brilliant. Let's make that a new word.
I find it interesting he put up an image of "Feminist Theory" when talking about Anita's videos. At least her video game series "Videogame Tropes v Women" series, because I feel what "Feminist Theory" does so well is bring out cultural significance and discuss the relationship of women and men, women and media and women and politics beyond the face value of saying "this is bad" etc... and that's something "Videogame Tropes v Women" has yet to do. It just talked about "Damsel in Distress" for three videos and hasn't brought out that significance to discuss how and why it's bad…only that it is. Still, it's a series with more videos to come, so I'll give her the benefit of the doubt. Her other videos do have that element, so why "Videogame Tropes v Women" doesn't is a bit odd and also disappointing.
Maybe I just expected too much from her. If anything, at least the backlash she's received really shows another element of game culture that's really awful: gamers. Point being, there's someone out there at least trying to bring up these issues...stop living in a bubble.
And we'll end with a nifty poster, just don't talk about it.