Jump to content
🔒 The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... ×

culture_dump

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    12

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by culture_dump

  1. Posted

    I have a real problem with the ending of this movie and in particular the political landscape of Patusan. Patusan's monarchy seems to be characteristic of a divine right of rule all central authority resting in its warrior king. The difference in the systems of governance between the monarchy (johnny's father) and the dictatorship (Colonel Chi) would be pretty minimal, both systems stemming from complete rule by a central figure. If you were an average citizen of Patusan you would have seen little difference in your life between to the change in governance. additionally the average citizen probably would follow the logic that the warrior king had been bested by another warrior king giving colonel chi the right of fealty. Johnny by returning and besting the new warrior king would take his rightful place and begin leading the people in a somewhat less oppressive rule but by denying his claim to the throne he has now left the people of Patusan in essential anarchy. He essentially says you're a democracy now go figure it out. This would likely lead to a hostile take over of the more powerful of Patusan's citizens or an outside power to take control again. My bet is that Iggy realizing the opportunity would seize control once Johnny has left forcing, Johnny to return to the island yet again to conquer an inept dictator, Surf Ninjas 2?

    • Like 6

  2. Posted

    So first when Vin Diesel confronts Toni Collette's character about taking the device she says she wants to use it to have 24/7 surveillance of all the countries in the world. The device has been set up to have no function but to hijack and immediately cause the satellites to crash. If the device is capable of accessing all the satellites to spy on everyone in the world why isn't the NSA guy using it for that purpose in the first place. I get that it wouldn't be as exciting or ridiculous but wouldn't a plot of a guy exposing political secrets every day be kind of timely.

     

    Second a big plot line in the movie was wether to sell/give away the device or to destroy it but they spend no time explaining who created the device and wether or not it could be replicated immediately after it was destroyed. Why when the NSA has there meeting are they holding onto it to show it off, shouldn't they have it down in a lap with a bunch of IT guys figuring out how the fuck it worked?

    • Like 2

  6. Posted

     

    He usually announces it in both the minis and in the intros to full episodes.

     

    Must have not been paying attention during the mini, not going to lie I almost always listen to the podcasts at work or while drinking so I probably just missed it. By the way Dr. Moreau drunk is truly an amazing experience. Thanks for the additional sources.

    • Like 1

  7. Posted

    PAUL! I was at this show and it /ruled/.

     

    My Q: Your impression of Pretzy sounds identical to your impression of Frank Stallone (you got 'em all "jimble-jambled"). So if they were to remake the film with Frank Stallone as Pretzy, who would you cast as Hercules?

     

    I'm pretty new to HDTGM but where do they post when and where they do live shows. I live in New York and totally would have gone if I'd known.

  8. Posted

    I'm surprised there was no mention of Zeus' "lightning", who needs special effects when you can have someone tack together rebar lighning bolts with a welder.

    troll10.png

     

    Honestly, I'm not sure which took me out of the movie faster the setting of mount Olympus or the lightening bolts. I think wielding is l pretty complimentary for what looks like a coat hanger wrapped in tin foil

  9. Posted

    Did anyone else notice how both the women in the podcast loved Arnold's performance which was clearly based on them being attracted to him in this movie as well as Jason and Paul loving the performance of his love interest which was also clearly based on the fact that she was attractive. The outrage by the opposite sex's on this episode was amazing. I died when they say the female lead has something wrong with her.

    • Like 2

  10. Posted

     

     

    It had something to do with Hercules not calling the captain sir, because he goes on to explain that no man is greater than Hercules. Honestly, I figured it was the writer thinking he was being clever because Greece was the birthplace of democracy. I could just picture him at his typewriter thinking to himself, 'Boy, I'd better show people I know history, otherwise they won't take this thing seriously!'.

     

    I had the same thought, but in a movie that consistently confuses Greek, Roman and Christian characters the idea of going for witty was absurd.

    • Like 1

  11. Posted

    Omission: there's a lot of lines in this movie that are baffling to say the least but one that stood out the most to me wasn't mentioned. When Hercules is talking to the ship captain he for no reason says "it's alright, I'm democratic." What the fuck is that suppose to mean??? I can't imagine any of Arnold's lines were improvised. Aubrey Wisberg's dialogue comes off like a homeless guy talking to himself outside Port Authority.

    • Like 6
×