StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Typhonis 1 wrote:Sauron was very scary in Generations. I especially liked the part in Generations where Wesley climbs up on the rock with the fish and sings
"Dip in pool
Is nice and cool
To catch a fish
So juicy SWEEEEET"
And keeps beating the fish on the rock.
_________________
Chuck Sonnenburg
"You willing to die for stupidity? You see, I am, if it'll teach you something."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ummm Chuck what exactly are you smoking/inhaling?

Old Toby, the finest weed in the Southfarthing.

Um, Typhonis, you do know how to quote, right?

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Damaramu wrote:

Magashi wrote:Instead of icing Sauron a cetury beforehand, a decade, a year, how about a month .... NAH, lets drop in on him at the height of his strength, when his uber-rocket is ready for launch, and he is at his most defensive.

Heh, I know you meant SORAN, but the idea of Sauron being in Generations is amusing.

Such a combination would probably be better. Instead of a Technobabble rift there could be a portal to middle earth and the one ring.

I think if Sauron took over romulus instead of shin-pad it would be a better film for it. He could board the enterprise instead of the lame viceroy, and we could have been treated to many shots of Sauron kicking the shit out of red-shirts.

Back on topic, yes it was orders of magnitude better than waterworld. And the postman, and the rock.

I'll also tag it being better than the Abyss(An adpation of Orson Card's book, yet another crap book-to-film movie) or Sphere(think thats the name of it, it was some really really crap sc-fi/thriller)

Sonnenburg wrote:Sauron was very scary in Generations. I especially liked the part in Generations where Wesley climbs up on the rock with the fish and sings
"Dip in pool
Is nice and cool
To catch a fish
So juicy SWEEEEET"
And keeps beating the fish on the rock.

*LMAO for five minutes straight*

ggs wrote:I'll also tag it being better than the Abyss(An adpation of Orson Card's book, yet another crap book-to-film movie) or Sphere(think thats the name of it, it was some really really crap sc-fi/thriller)

HEATHEN! The Abyss was an amazing film, one of Cameron's best. Okay, NO book to film adaptation is as good as the book for the simple reason that books have no budget, no bad acting possibility and no SFX glitches. But to say Abyss sucked is, well, weird. Still, personal tastes.

Sphere was okay, never read the book, I don't too like Chrichton's way of writing, it is fairly basic and more on tech and science than plot and character development, though Prey which I'm reading now is superb strangely.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:Sphere was okay, never read the book, I don't too like Chrichton's way of writing, it is fairly basic and more on tech and science than plot and character development, though Prey which I'm reading now is superb strangely.

Read the book and you will see the movie for the twisted shit that it is.

IG-88E wrote:

Admiral Valdemar wrote:Sphere was okay, never read the book, I don't too like Chrichton's way of writing, it is fairly basic and more on tech and science than plot and character development, though Prey which I'm reading now is superb strangely.

Read the book and you will see the movie for the twisted shit that it is.

Hmm, may do and find out what the fuss is, my next Chrichton book may be Timeline or Airframe since the one I'm reading is actually interesting though tech and science is above all else (lucky I'm a scientist ).

I still have The Salmon of Doubt, Night Watch and The Blind Watchmaker to read yet, phew!

Definately read Airframe. That is one hella book.

IG-88E wrote:

Sonnenburg wrote:Sauron was very scary in Generations. I especially liked the part in Generations where Wesley climbs up on the rock with the fish and sings
"Dip in pool
Is nice and cool
To catch a fish
So juicy SWEEEEET"
And keeps beating the fish on the rock.

*LMAO for five minutes straight*

You should see his reviewof Fellowship of the Ring.

As to Waterworld, it wasn't too bad. I've definitely seen worse. Pearl Harbor, for one. Episode I was definitely the weakest of the series, but its saving grace, to me, is that every character aside from Jar-Jar and Anakin was a good character. Qui-Gon Jinn was very well-written, and we got to know him as much as we knew Obi-Wan before he was killed off by Darth Maul. McGregor did a great job as the young Obi-Wan, Natalie Portman did well, and so did everyone else. And the writing wasn't too bad. The plot really didn't have any major holes, and the lightsaber battle was kick-ass. Jar-Jar and Anakin's stupid antics basically ruined a series of what were otherwise perfectly good scenes.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:

ggs wrote:I'll also tag it being better than the Abyss(An adpation of Orson Card's book, yet another crap book-to-film movie) or Sphere(think thats the name of it, it was some really really crap sc-fi/thriller)

HEATHEN! The Abyss was an amazing film, one of Cameron's best. Okay, NO book to film adaptation is as good as the book for the simple reason that books have no budget, no bad acting possibility and no SFX glitches. But to say Abyss sucked is, well, weird. Still, personal tastes.

The reason I didnt like the Abyss was it shows all the hallmarks of being a much longer film which was crudely cut back to shorten it. The ending was way too abrupt, the ending sequence was only ~5 minutes compared to the length of the entire film. The book also had the same problem IIRC.

But your right The Abyss isnt one of the worse sc-fi films, but it sure as hell isnt the best.

ggs wrote:

Admiral Valdemar wrote:

ggs wrote:I'll also tag it being better than the Abyss(An adpation of Orson Card's book, yet another crap book-to-film movie) or Sphere(think thats the name of it, it was some really really crap sc-fi/thriller)

HEATHEN! The Abyss was an amazing film, one of Cameron's best. Okay, NO book to film adaptation is as good as the book for the simple reason that books have no budget, no bad acting possibility and no SFX glitches. But to say Abyss sucked is, well, weird. Still, personal tastes.

The reason I didnt like the Abyss was it shows all the hallmarks of being a much longer film which was crudely cut back to shorten it. The ending was way too abrupt, the ending sequence was only ~5 minutes compared to the length of the entire film. The book also had the same problem IIRC.

But your right The Abyss isnt one of the worse sc-fi films, but it sure as hell isnt the best.

Did you ever see the special edition? I tend to see that as the best as it leaves in the whole ending sequence they had to cut for cinema due to length.

Still, if a film isn't totally loyal to a book then I mark it for sheer quality of the film experience even if it is not like the book at all. Starship Troopers for instance was about as close to the Heinlein book as Teletubbies is to Evangelion, but it was a fun and enjoyable popcorn flick, just had the name of a totally different frnachise though.

NecronLord wrote:Back on topic, yes it was orders of magnitude better than ... and the rock.

Can I ask what piece of shit Jerry Bruckheimer excrement is any good at all? They all suck. Replace the rock with any shit that hack has done.

Vympel wrote:

NecronLord wrote:Back on topic, yes it was orders of magnitude better than ... and the rock.

Can I ask what piece of shit Jerry Bruckheimer excrement is any good at all? They all suck. Replace the rock with any shit that hack has done.

The Rock and Con Air are good along with Armageddon. The first because it has Connery in and VX gas, the second because it is directed by Brit Simon West famous for the Buddweiser frogs and the last because it is Bruce Willis saving the world, again!

But anything else by Michael "pyrophiliac" Bay other than Armageddon will just be balls, Pearl Harbor was good in the action scenes if only because Bay has a sick fetish for explosions and nowt else.

Bruckheimer can produce good stuff, he and Ridl;ey Scott did Black Hawk Down remember.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
The Rock and Con Air are good along with Armageddon. The first because it has Connery in and VX gas, the second because it is directed by Brit Simon West famous for the Buddweiser frogs and the last because it is Bruce Willis saving the world, again!

Erm ... you LIKED those?

But anything else by Michael "pyrophiliac" Bay other than Armageddon will just be balls, Pearl Harbor was good in the action scenes if only because Bay has a sick fetish for explosions and nowt else.

Bruckheimer can produce good stuff, he and Ridl;ey Scott did Black Hawk Down remember.

Black Hawk Down was saved from craptacularness by Ridley Scott. And even then, it wasn't THAT good.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
I still have The Salmon of Doubt, Night Watch and The Blind Watchmaker to read yet, phew!

Hmm, you seem to like the same books as me, I have all three of them. Don't read The Salmon of Doubt though, it is extremely good and the death of such a good writer is bought home after reading the first part of the story he was working on...

Soulman wrote:

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
I still have The Salmon of Doubt, Night Watch and The Blind Watchmaker to read yet, phew!

Hmm, you seem to like the same books as me, I have all three of them. Don't read The Salmon of Doubt though, it is extremely good and the death of such a good writer is bought home after reading the first part of the story he was working on...

Well I just finished Prey now so my mum can read that now (and totally get baffled by the science ) while I restart wither Nigh Watch or Doug's last masterpiece.

I really don't want to read Salmon either since I know it is incomplete and it still feels wrong having that guy not around anymore, but it will be a tribute too I guess.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:

Vympel wrote:

NecronLord wrote:Back on topic, yes it was orders of magnitude better than ... and the rock.

Can I ask what piece of shit Jerry Bruckheimer excrement is any good at all? They all suck. Replace the rock with any shit that hack has done.

The Rock and Con Air are good along with Armageddon. The first because it has Connery in and VX gas, the second because it is directed by Brit Simon West famous for the Buddweiser frogs and the last because it is Bruce Willis saving the world, again!

But anything else by Michael "pyrophiliac" Bay other than Armageddon will just be balls, Pearl Harbor was good in the action scenes if only because Bay has a sick fetish for explosions and nowt else.

Bruckheimer can produce good stuff, he and Ridl;ey Scott did Black Hawk Down remember.

None of that saves any of those (though I have never seen all of Con Air. I turned over half an hour in.)

As for Armageddon. I have to say that nemesis is also far better than that (with the possible exception of "This is how we do things on russian space station")

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
I really don't want to read Salmon either since I know it is incomplete and it still feels wrong having that guy not around anymore, but it will be a tribute too I guess.

The first 2/3rds of the book is actually just a collection of articles and a short story so you're safe with them, it was just so sad when I got to the end of the actual story, The Salmon of Dount. in one of the interviews in the book it said he was going to write another Hitchhikers book

ggs wrote:I'll also tag it being better than the Abyss(An adpation of Orson Card's book, yet another crap book-to-film movie)...

I should clarify that Card wrote the novelisation of the FILM(!!). And with feedback/help from James Cameron.

And yes, you should see The Abyss Special Edition. Like the T2 SE, it makes the theactrical version almost look like a different, weaker film.