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

Lando

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    1534

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Lando

  2. Posted

    I haven't see this movie, but I am suggesting it mostly because from everything I have heard it could be an interesting movie do discuss if they were able to get someone involved. Basically this movie is a Fast & Furious ripoff that was written, funded and produced by one of the worst subprime lenders of the recent mortgage bubble. He also tried to use it as a launch pad for his girlfriend's transition from a soap star to movie star. This film ultimately bombed costing $26M it only made $6M

     

    Here's the trailed, but if you're mildly clever you can find the whole thing on youtube

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-8qDoDrAC

    • Like 1

  3. Posted

    Shit you're right. Damn them for being similar titles and the fact that the past couple of summers have featured the movie of the week being unnecessarily put on the boards as a terrible movie. This movie does deserve to be discussed as it truly is batshit insane. Cat flu anyone?

     

    Not only that, but the movie is usually also generally pretty well received and the poster acts as if it's common knowledge that the movie they're suggesting is garbage.

  4. Posted

    There is a brilliant movie series that follows a different character through each movie; the Danish Pusher trilogy (there is an English remake, but as usual stick to the original). These movies were made by Nicolas Winding Refin who is best known for Drive (and I didn't care for Drive, mostly because the dialog was very very awkward and flowed horribly).

    • Pusher follows a low level drug dealer who owes a mid-level dealer a bunch of money and gets some cocaine on loan to pay him back only to have to dump it to avoid the cops. It follows him as he tries to avoid the cops, the drug dealer and get the money to get them off his back.
    • Pusher II follows the friend of the 1st movie as he gets out of jail and tries to stay away from his previous life.
    • Pusher III follows the mid-level dealer from the 1st 2 movies as he tries to expand his territory and move up the drug dealing chain

    I highly recommend all three movies whether or not you liked Drive.

    • Like 1

  5. Posted

    I am sorry to say this because I enjoy your podcast, but that was more than a little embarrassing. You had 3 panellists talking about sexism, and the two males in the group almost nearly drowned out the female voice. It was like there was some kind of ironic radio play happening that was meant teach some sort of lesson, but all it did was reinforce the stereotypes that men are domineering and women are passive. Good job, and/or shame on you... :unsure:

     

    I noticed this too. I also noticed that there would be times that the two men would decide that something was sexist, but that the woman on the panel gave a different interpretation that in some way empowered the woman and made it not necessarily sexist (for example in the "guy gets the hot girl" scenario she said it could be that the "girl gets the best guy") but was sort of out-voted on whether or not it was sexist.

     

    I think that this is a difficult subject to evaluate because it's hard to quantify. That's the appeal of the Bechtel test, although not perfect it gives some sort of measurable criteria for sexism. There is a danger in looking for sexism like this in that we might be able to read sexism into anything to fit our preconceived notions. Think about Ancient Aliens, the "experts" on the show have decided that aliens made contact with ancient people and in looking for evidence to support their idea they find evidence of extraterrestrials in just about every piece of ancient art. I think that is a very real danger of the same thing happening in any form of attempted interpretation of people's intent. None of this is to say that sexism doesn't exist in modern society, just it's hard to objectively measure and as a result our conversation on the subject is doomed to be sloppy.

     

    There is also the issue of trolling, which I won't get into.

  6. Posted

    So two things:

    1. I recall that a Freakonimcs episode discussed the "old words make people walk slower" study and basically said that when the recorder of the data was blind as to whether or not people were primed with old words the difference disappeared. It appears to be the result of the bias of the researcher, not the subjects.

    2. You call yourself a rap aficionado and discussed "Pop goes the weasel" and yet NO mention of 3rd Bass' classic Pop Goes the Weasel? Shame on you!

  7. Posted

    I think I found a movie that might explain it:

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1630036/

    Courageous, it was released at the end of September 2011, it cost $2M and on opening weekend made $9M with an overall take of $34M

     

    Of course I could be looking to back fit patterns where none exist, but I have found that Hollywood frequently operates on a predictable pattern like this.

     

    Also, out of curiosity did you see Courageous?

  8. Posted

    I knew those were recently released (there was also one that was released about Jesus that did well), but the pipeline for making a movie is usually about 2-3 years. Those films were also were a big reason why I said that there was probably a successful movie a couple of years ago that set the ball rolling on all of these films. I'm invested in enough in this hypothesis to type up a couple of paragraphs, but not invested enough to go digging around on IMDB.

  10. Posted

     

    Cloud ten pictures!!! I think that says it all. wow hollywood is really running out of ideas if they are taking Kirk Cameron movies and remaking them. Nick cage is going to deliver in this movie, Joke's on us.

     

    Hollywood is first and foremost greedy. I would bet you that some time in the past two years someone released a Christian movie that swept up at the box office and Hollywood executives decided that it was a hugely neglected market and decided to go after it.

  14. Posted

    Of all of PWSA's movies this one is probably the least HTGM-worthy. Not that it's not worthy of an episode, but it's certainly more enjoyable than pretty much anything else that he's done.

     

    Also, I didn't realize that he made Pompeii, but when I saw that my reaction was "that's about right."

  16. Posted

    It has been a while since I saw this movie, but I remember it being more fun than The Lost World, but still pretty bad. To the best of my recollection Dr. Grant's character is completely different than in the first one and is now a wisecracking dino survival expert (though I guess surviving dinosaurs running wild once qualifies one as an expert as much as possible) and the Raptors are now essentially Gremlins...right down to the pack leader having a Mohawk.

     

    • Like 1

  20. Posted

    Bumping this 'cause I'm watching it for the first time in a long time. It's funny to watch this after having watched Armageddon so recently because you can really feel Jerry Bruckheimer's style in both of them. This movie is dumb fun, but it feels dated.

  22. Posted

    Oh I know. The whole movie is filled with scenes of "We need to do X" [starts trying to do X] "OH NO OUR Y IS BROKEN! WE CAN'T DO X" [Ends up doing X in an unconventional way]. It wears down your ability to care about the outcome of a situation when you know everything is at super high stake, but yet nothing is really at that high of stake.

     

    Tangent: What I love about Game of Thrones is that it doesn't follow this conventional storytelling formula. A beloved character gets themselves into a tight situation? There's a pretty good chance that they're not magically making it out alive. Game of Thrones is very much the antithesis of the Michael Bay philosophy of film making.

    • Like 2

  23. Posted

    I have not seen this movie since it came out on VHS and it is crazier than I remember. Some stray observations:

    - I want someone to tally up the number of times you hear the "woosh" sound in space, I bet it's at least 3 wooshes per minute. At least. And only about 3/5ths of the movie takes place in space.

    - And the explosions? Good lord. I know this is Michael Bay, but rocks will smash into each other and explode like they're made out of flint and filled with gunpowder.

    - How much of this movie is slow motion? As it is the movie is 2 & 1/2 hours, but if you played all of the footage at normal speed you could probably cut 45 minutes off the running time.

  24. Posted

    I taped this off HBO and am watching it right now. it's pretty fun but man is it stupid. some of these lines are crazy, like when the one kaiju sends out that EMP and shuts down the one jaeger and they're like "the other jaegers are digital, Gypsy is analog, nuclear!" what the fuck does that mean?? later they say Gypsy is basically a nuclear reactor, generating electricity presumably, wouldn't an EMP be just as effective at shutting them down? also, if Gyspy is the only one that's nuclear what do the other jaegers run on, gasoline? coal?

     

    This is making me picture a steampunk version of Pacific Rim. I would watch that.

    • Like 1
×