Movie News/Discussion Thread 2

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Saigon Slick
Doctor ♥
Joined in 2008
AKA: Deadpool / sntaa

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Saigon Slick » Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:27 am

What's wrong with funkos exactly? I don't collect them, but they look quite nice.

Image Image
User avatar
Rudolphin
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Rudolphin » Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:56 am

Saigon Slick wrote:What's wrong with funkos exactly? I don't collect them, but they look quite nice.


They take any and every popular character and/or figure of note and turn them into bland, homogeneous blocks of plastic which they sell for exorbitant profit to idiots who want to show how many pop-culture references they are aware of.

Like Skippy correctly asserted: references in of themselves are not entertainment.

Gemini73 wrote:Yes your are a sanctimonious twat

Bloggy blog blog blog.

Night Call: a game what I worked on
User avatar
Skippy
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Skippy » Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:06 am

Rudolphin wrote:
Saigon Slick wrote:What's wrong with funkos exactly? I don't collect them, but they look quite nice.


They take any and every popular character and/or figure of note and turn them into bland, homogeneous blocks of plastic which they sell for exorbitant profit to idiots who want to show how many pop-culture references they are aware of.

Like Skippy correctly asserted: references in themselves are not entertainment.


The Funko design is just woeful, it simultaneously robs character designs of what made them great and offers no character of its own. If the base look was better, I wouldn't have a problem with them. The Disney Infinity figures are a good example of that kind of thing done right. They found a stylised way to give a host of characters a single cohesive look that also looked great itself.

User avatar
Saigon Slick
Doctor ♥
Joined in 2008
AKA: Deadpool / sntaa

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Saigon Slick » Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:11 am

Rudolphin wrote:
Saigon Slick wrote:What's wrong with funkos exactly? I don't collect them, but they look quite nice.


They take any and every popular character and/or figure of note and turn them into bland, homogeneous blocks of plastic which they sell for exorbitant profit to idiots who want to show how many pop-culture references they are aware of.

Like Skippy correctly asserted: references in themselves are not entertainment.


Not discussing Ready Player One at all as I have neither read the book nor bothered to watch the trailer, but I'm really not seeing the problem with Funkos/Pops at all. Apologies if I've picked this up wrongly, but this post and Skippy's underlying point about "junk for people who collect funkos" just screams of an unwarranted superiority complex over a perceived intellectual gap between those who are smart enough to see funkos for what they are, and those who quite like having a miniature depiction of their favourite characters. Like, pop culture references in and of themselves are not entertainment, but that's not really what those things are.

I'll reserve judgement on the film until I've seen some reviews.

EDIT: FWIW I take the opposite view - I thought the Infinity stuff looked quite cheap and nasty, but I quite like the design of the Pop figurines. My GF got me a Dug one not long after we started going out because it reminded her of my dog, I thought that was a nice touch and a thoughtful gift(rather than homogenised trash).

Image Image
User avatar
Rudolphin
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Rudolphin » Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:00 pm

Skippy wrote:
Rudolphin wrote:
Saigon Slick wrote:What's wrong with funkos exactly? I don't collect them, but they look quite nice.


They take any and every popular character and/or figure of note and turn them into bland, homogeneous blocks of plastic which they sell for exorbitant profit to idiots who want to show how many pop-culture references they are aware of.

Like Skippy correctly asserted: references in themselves are not entertainment.


The Funko design is just woeful, it simultaneously robs character designs of what made them great and offers no character of its own. If the base look was better, I wouldn't have a problem with them. The Disney Infinity figures are a good example of that kind of thing done right. They found a stylised way to give a host of characters a single cohesive look that also looked great itself.


I agree, and feel the design of the Funkos themselves are indicative of the purpose they serve. The Infinity figures are faithful representations of the characters that people love. Funkos are melted down to the point where recognition of reference is their sole purpose.

EDIT: Still, the use of 'idiots' was harsh and uncalled for.

Gemini73 wrote:Yes your are a sanctimonious twat

Bloggy blog blog blog.

Night Call: a game what I worked on
User avatar
Rudolphin
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Rudolphin » Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:39 am



Mortal Engines trailer. Although it does its damndest to convince you of the fact, this is not directed by Peter Jackson after all. Rather it's Christian Rivers, one of the VFX heads at Wingnut. He's been rumoured to be helming a Damnbusters remake for years but obviously that's fallen through (no doubt the dog was involved).

The concept is fascinating so I was a little disappointed to see it's based on a YA novel. Still, I actually downloaded the first in the series and have been blasting through it. All very "Maze Runner" so far.

As for the trailer itself: that's some super conspicuous CGI right there. I mean, there's no way they could have gone full photorealism but it does look very cartoonish.

Last edited by Rudolphin on Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:56 am, edited 2 times in total.
Gemini73 wrote:Yes your are a sanctimonious twat

Bloggy blog blog blog.

Night Call: a game what I worked on
User avatar
Frank
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Frank » Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:45 am

Weren’t they just meant to rename the dambusters dog “Digger”?

Image
User avatar
Chestnut Snowleaves
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Chestnut Snowleaves » Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:08 am

So, this is a thing.



I am a male and I have nothing but positive things to say about this.

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
Skippy
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Skippy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:24 am

myrrh heat than light wrote:So, this is a thing.



I am a male and I have nothing but positive things to say about this.


Well, it does have James Corden in it, but the rest of the cast :o

User avatar
Rex Kramer
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Rex Kramer » Wed Dec 20, 2017 9:11 am

All the way through that trailer I thought it was missing that certain something. Then, popping up like a turd that won't flush, there he was.

User avatar
abcd
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
AKA: abcd

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by abcd » Wed Dec 20, 2017 9:30 am

When did Danny Ocean die? Who was Danny Ocean again?

Image
User avatar
Preezy
Skeletor
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Preezy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 9:40 am

Meh, looks completely forgettable.

User avatar
Tomous
I Pissed My Pants
Joined in 2010
AKA: Vampbuster

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Tomous » Wed Dec 20, 2017 11:33 am

I'm pretty sure the first Ocean's 11 was great but all that comes to mind when I think about the sequels is they decided a plot line where Julia Robert's character looks like the actress Julia Roberts was a good idea.

User avatar
Grumpy David
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Cubeamania

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Grumpy David » Wed Dec 20, 2017 11:42 am

Did anyone watch Female Ghostbusters? What was the general consensus? That got a lot of hate and tbf it did look pretty gooseberry fool from the trailer.


myrrh heat than light wrote:So, this is a thing.



I am a male and I have nothing but positive things to say about this.


:lol:

I am looking forward to reading the YouTube comments.

I heard they called it Ocean's 8 because women make 77% of what a man makes.

User avatar
Chestnut Snowleaves
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Chestnut Snowleaves » Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:18 pm

Probably opening a can of worms here, but...

I'd consider myself a feminist but I think this (and Ghostbusters) are going about things the wrong way. I want to see strong female characters in films, and I want to see more ethnic minorities in cinema too. But rebooting existing franchises by recasting the characters with females is just stupid. I don't want to see Debbie Ocean just as I don't want to see Larry Croft or Alan Ripley. I don't want a black James Bond either.

These are existing characters and they're being changed because of no other reason than to cash in on the 'Hollywood is sexist' train. I can just imagine the pitch for this (probably delivered by a guy), 'it's Oceans Eleven - but with girls!' That, I'm afraid, is the definition of discrimination.

Mad Max: Fury Road and The Hunger Games movies proved that films can deliver strong female roles without resorting to gender recasting. I hope this fails, as I suspect it will.

Yeah I know, bumpain white guy etc.

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
Frank
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Frank » Wed Dec 20, 2017 1:27 pm

Are the characters in Ghostbusters the same characters but played by women, though? :shifty: I thought they were new (still haven’t actually watched it, though)

Looking at the cast list, though, can’t see Awkwafina’s name without thinking of this:



Bad branding.

Image
User avatar
Chestnut Snowleaves
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Chestnut Snowleaves » Wed Dec 20, 2017 1:50 pm

Frank wrote:Are the characters in Ghostbusters the same characters but played by women, though? :shifty: I thought they were new (still haven’t actually watched it, though)


No, but it's still an obviously intentional recast of an all male team into an all female one, purely for gender politics. Why else would they include Chris Hemsworth in the 'stupid bimbo' role?

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
BID0
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Essex

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by BID0 » Wed Dec 20, 2017 2:05 pm

Ghostbusters was average. It was surprisingly okay during the first half (I went in with low expectations) and the final act was just terrible and didn't make much sense and was a CGI mess.

I'm surprised an Ocean's 11 with women finally got made, it was rumored all the way back when Ocean's 13 came out.

User avatar
Partridge Iciclebubbles
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Partridge Iciclebubbles » Wed Dec 20, 2017 2:18 pm

Grumpy David wrote:Did anyone watch Female Ghostbusters? What was the general consensus? That got a lot of hate and tbf it did look pretty gooseberry fool from the trailer.


It was mostly terrible with a couple of good bits.

Remaking or rebooting a beloved movie is almost always a recipe for disaster. The nostalgia that people feel for the originals (even if the original was flawed) means that remakes/reboots are always going to be judged harshly.

I didn’t really give a gooseberry fool that Ghostbusters had four women in, the problem with it was a weak villain, a weak script, poor jokes and unnecessarily shoehorning in cameos from the original Ghostbuster actors.

User avatar
Grumpy David
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Cubeamania

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Grumpy David » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:45 pm

myrrh heat than light wrote:Probably opening a can of worms here, but...

I'd consider myself a feminist but I think this (and Ghostbusters) are going about things the wrong way. I want to see strong female characters in films, and I want to see more ethnic minorities in cinema too. But rebooting existing franchises by recasting the characters with females is just stupid. I don't want to see Debbie Ocean just as I don't want to see Larry Croft or Alan Ripley. I don't want a black James Bond either.

These are existing characters and they're being changed because of no other reason than to cash in on the 'Hollywood is sexist' train. I can just imagine the pitch for this (probably delivered by a guy), 'it's Oceans Eleven - but with girls!' That, I'm afraid, is the definition of discrimination.

Mad Max: Fury Road and The Hunger Games movies proved that films can deliver strong female roles without resorting to gender recasting. I hope this fails, as I suspect it will.

Yeah I know, bumpain white guy etc.



To quote you from 10/15 years ago:

It'll be gooseberry fool and you know it.

May not have been you on Gamesradar.


Return to “Stuff”