Cam Bert

The Theodore Rex opening crawl was pretty classic

Clearly we made them. That's what Wanda June was trying to tell them. How is this even a question?

Possibly the only person on set more coked out than Stephen King

Sorry a bit late but even if you hate Ewoks are you going to tell me this never made you cry?

Maybe you can help me then Fister. I use to read a fair amount of DC stuff. Particularly my favourite characters were Green Lantern and Flash. I was also big into the 80s stuff like Suicide Squad and the JLI. However, around the time of DC's... second or third 52 week event. The one after Superboy Prime, I just got tired of lot of the stuff. It must have been around of the start of Blackest Night as well. Like you said there was too much tie in stuff. Like I always felt I was missing something or things would happen in an unrelated title that would pop in one I read with no explanation. It was around this time I kinda just quit on the DC stuff. When the new 52 started I thought this would be a perfect jumping on point, however somebody told me that it was not exactly "all new." I wanted to get back into Green Lantern and Suicide Squad but I wasn't sure if it was a fresh start or how much I needed to know about the stuff leading up to the new 52 to enjoy it or understand it. If I were to just pick up Green Lantern from the start of the new 52 is it accessible if I had not read past the start of Blackest Night?

My issue with the art is not so much the line work but more with the colours. I get the vibe they're wanting to put out and some of the pages really pop with a mixture of these bright psychedelic colours, but some were just awash in pinks and reds and that's what gets me after awhile. Like those times, particularly when with the cyclops, for me it felt kinda flat because of the colours. I'm still reading it, but I think I'll probably enjoy it more as a whole when it's done.

Seeing as there is lots of Fraction talk in here, I'm curious if anybody is reading ODY-C? I'm not entirely sold on it. I don't know if it's the art of what, but I just can't get into it. Also, for anybody that liked Fraction's Hawkeye I would highly recommend The Superior Foes of Spider-Man, which I thought was the best new Marvel book since Hawkeye. Steve Lieber who's the illustrator on Superior Foes did some of the fill in work for Aja on Hawkeye, and both of them have really good story telling in their work. If anybody has read Superior Foes, just think of that double page spread of the break-in at Owl's head quarters. Also for a comedy story his pacing and staging of the gags is top notch. Nick Spencer's writing is also equally great. Good mix of broad and subtle humor, surprising amounts of character depth and a "who and why dunnit" story that keeps you guessing until the end. If you haven't read it it centers on six C to Z list Spider-Man villians (personally I'd say Shocker in an A list villain but I'm mostly alone on that) lead by Boomerang who form a new Sinister Six not to defeat Spider-Man but to pull of an elaborate heist. A heist that is all a ploy by Boomerang to pay off his debts, or is really about talking over the Maggia, or is all about getting revenge, and the twists keep coming as other gangs and other villains get tangled into it all. Even if you're not familiar with all the characters don't worry because most were minor characters without large backstories anyways, and it covers at some point all you need to know about their pasts. In fact in 17 issues or so Nick Spencer gives some of them more growth and depth than they ever had. If you're still not sold, at a certain point one of the main supporting characters is the head of a mob boss attached to an RC car.

As usual due to time zones I miss out on the bulk on the conversation. I second or third or whatever number it's at the idea of a comic discussion thread.

Anyway, just throw in my two cents in on the whole AoU thing. My friend who I saw it with is a Joss Whedon fanboy and a half. In fact I only got them to watch any of the Marvel movies based on the fact Whedon did Avengers and I told them you had to see the leading up movies to really get it. Anyway, when the movie was done we were both kinda disappointed but for different reasons. His reason was kinda simple and that is that this movie is peak Whedon. As good as a writer he is Whedon tends to fall back to certain themes and tropes and this movie hit everyone one on the head to the point it's almost paint by numbers. Most of all was the death of Quicksilver. I felt Quicksilver was a mistake from the beginning. Yes, I am I life long comic fan and I understand his place in the Avengers but given the weird rights issues with Fox, why even bother? If they wanted Scarlett Witch, why not just mention she has a twin brother but we don't really see him a la her counter part in Days of Future Past. He didn't really add anything to the movie, and his death came off as kinda cheap. If we look at Coulson in the first movie that's a meaningful death. This is a character that through multiple appearances made a connection with the audience and the other characters in the film. So much so his death is what finally gets the characters to work together. He died saving the day and gave them something to "avenge." None of that is present with Quicksilver. He's a character who was kinda a jerk and a bad guy until moments before his death. If he died saving Stark, the man whom he hated and drove him and his sister to side with Ultron it would have had a greater impact not only for his character but Tony Stark as well. Rather he died saving a character whom with he supposedly had a rivalry despite them only really interacting barely three times before. In the end he died to save a character who we only just started caring for because Joss gave him a secret family. For me it just was weak writing and character development. My friend unaware of comic history or inter-company deals, just said it's because Joss Whedon has to kill a main character. If we look at his track record Coulson in Avengers, Wash in Serenity, Penny in Dr. Horrible, Kitty Pryde in his X-Men run, Spike, Buffy and Angle from Buffy, this is a guy who likes to kill characters and it's comes off as lazy writing. That sounds harsh and some of those deaths are handled well but if you are stuck with how to motivate a character or cause change in them, having someone die is a cheap and effective way of doing this. This works in most of the shows and comics within the context of the stories but when you look at them all lined up it's clear it is nothing more than a crutch to how he writes. To cut a long story short we both agreed Joss needs to take a bit of a breather and ultimately it's good that he's off doing his own thing again. Again I didn't hate Age of Ultron, just was coming off of Winter Soldier and Guardians Marvel seemed to be climbing and this was more of a step down.

Curious how a thread about a low budget movie based on a short story in which machine comes to life and kill humans turned into an AoU discussion which is a major tent pole movie based on a series of comics in which robots come to life and wants to kill humans

Well most of the ones I would say have already been mentioned (John Carpenter's The Thing is easy one of my all time favourite movies) but here are a few maybe under the radar films that are scary but maybe not traditionally scary. Frailty - The story of a father who goes a little crazy and takes his two young children with him and involves them on his quest to kill people who are really demons in disguise. This movie works for me because it could very easily be a true story. May - A shy girl develops a crush and falls in love with not so positive results. Pontypool - A small Canadian city is overrun by zombies but rather than see it we hear about it via the people trapped at the local radio station. Stephen McHatty makes up for Theodore Rex is this great example of creating tension and fear without really showing anything. End of the Line - People on a subway car clash with a doomsday cult. Not really all that scary, but just a good little Canadian horror film that I think more people should see.

Also how long before Jason goes into comic book talk about the Green Goblin?

But this time it was aliens and not supernatural forces!

Just out of my own curiosity (potential spoilers for those that have not seen this film yet) did anybody here actually have an electric carver? My family never had one nor did anybody else I knew growing up. After seeing this movie I remember asking my father why don't we have one, and he told me it was because a real man knows how to use a knife. Maybe it was a regional or generational thing but I was always fascinated by it.

Yes! I love this movie and have such fond memories of it. So many classic moments! I agree with June, this is a perfect HDTGM movie. I can't wait for next week to come!

The first movie was just Vin Diesel, Paul Walker, Michelle Rodriguez and Jordana Brewster? That seems like a legit family. Girlfriends, sister, and friend. That makes sense. Were there others?

Related/unrelated side story: When I was teenager me and my friend would talk about what movie stars we thought were hot and which ones were the top five we'd want to sleep with. In the middle of one of these conversations one of my friends asked who would be the best male celebrity to hang out with. Eventually this morphed into top five guys we'd like to share a beer with. While as I've grown my taste in women has changed, my top three guys to share a beer with has not and for years that number one spot has belonged to Kurt Russell. This film not only confirmed that all these years later that I made a good choice but that it would a nice Belgium ale.

So I'll just to warn you all that this post will be long so feel free to skip past it or just skim through it. So if you recall from the minisode thread, I had never seen a Fast and Furious movie. This was the first that I watched from beginning to end and I have to admit it was fun. Stupid, but fun. I mean stupid in the best possible why. Think of Jimmy Pardo calling people idiot, that's my reaction to this movie. Yes nothing makes sense, so it is kinda silly to nitpick certain things. For example, no one who made this movies seems to know how explosions work. It's fine to point that out but who cares it's fun. However, I got stuck on the dialogue of the film. Every line comes off as very written, and nothing seems natural. It is a serious of catch phrases and one liners and things that are suppose to be deep and sound good in a sound bite but make no real sense outside of it. Everything is so serious that I think the writers actually believe what they were writing. If that is the case Dom's speeches and talks on family and what it means take a whole new turn. It makes Dom seem like he was some kind of cult leader and his family were his followers. This idea sank deeper and deeper into my head so I decided to do some research. You could argue that Dom and his family are a gang, and the line between gang and cult is rather thin. According to one paper "The primary difference between cults and gangs is that cults have as their axial principle of organization some spiritual/religious/ideological belief system; gangs, on the other hand, are commonly perceived to have no such well-developed belief system." Now this is maybe where you guys can fill me in. My knowledge of this franchise is based on Furious 7, some YouTube videos, and what I've heard in this podcast. As far as I can tell none of "The Family"'s actions are motivated for their own profit. It seems to be issues personal issues or wanting to stay together. Their higher power is Dom and the concept of family. They will do whatever it takes to preserve that and protect it. Combine that with the have cross imagery and Dom's somewhat supernatural powers, I'm pretty sure this a cult you guys. I found a fifteen point check list for the criteria of a cult, and based solely on this movie alone they check off ten of the fifteen. Some of these points are: The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law. The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society. The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations). ‪ The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities). ‪ Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities. ‪ Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members. ‪ The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group. The last point seems ify given the ending of the film but if not for the unfortunate passing of Paul Walker he wouldn't have left. By all accounts he was ready and willing for Furious Eight, so in a sense nobody ever leaves the family. Each film from what I can tell the family is getting bigger and bigger, recruiting new members to it. Eventually his "Family" will be so big they'll have to move to a compound down in South America. Why this also strikes me as odd, as that a lot of the fans of the franchise do take this message to heart. It is becoming or has become a way of life to them, thus making this seem even more cultish. Years from now on census papers "family" will be considered a religion much in the way Jedi has become one in the UK. Again I enjoyed the movie, and will probably go back and watch some of the older ones, I just found "The Family" to come off as vaguely creepy.

The amount of hate I have for Corona is the exact inverse as the amount of love of have for you two right now. Corona and beer should never be used in the same sentence.

Hey Fister, did you ever read Crichton's Lost World? I heard he basically had to write it so they could make the sequel movie and he just kinda threw science and caution into the wind for it. Never read it myself so can't confirm that.

I believe I read somewhere while Crichton and Spielberg both believed in the evolved into birds/warm blooded theory it was decided to go with traditional depictions of dinosaurs as not to confuse or alienate audiences.

So I just checked the iTunes and I have to wait until September 2nd, so I guess that's not so bad. Also fun fact for fans of the series in Japan the Fast and Furious movies are known as "Wild Speed" this one is "Wild Speed: Sky Mission"

I'll see if I can track in down. Japan is behind America sometimes with movies, so I don't think its on iTunes Japan yet. Yea I was bummed for my fellow Cameron as well.

Hey guys. So I guess this is a bit of an embarrassing thing to admit as a fan of HDTGM but.... I've never seen any of the Fast & Furious movies. Maybe ten years ago or so my friend tried to show me the first, but I was never into cars and all that so I kinda checked out and left half way through. Now I know the movies have gone on to get crazier and crazier and achieve cult status but something about them just always makes me turn away. I know the basic story, and I know it's not suppose to make a lot of sense and just be crazy fun but could I enjoy this movie have never seen any of the others?