|
|
|
Gorky

Space Pope
   
|
|
 |
« #483 : 01-06-2012 03:53 »
|
|
Billion Backs is easily the most divisive of the four movies; some people love it and some people can't stand it. I personally didn't care for it the first time I saw it (probably because I expected the emotional arc from BBS to carry over, and the shippy part of me was annoyed to find this was not the case)--but, on subsequent viewings, it's really grown on me.
Like cyber_turnip says, it's a totally wacky premise...but, in a way, that's refreshing. I'm not fond of Fry's characterization, but humor-wise I think the movie's spot-on. Everything with the League of Robots is hilarious, and Amy, Leela, and Zapp's escape from the tentacle is one of my favorite things the show's ever done (I just really dig the dynamic between those three characters).
So, yeah. Billion Backs is still only my third-favorite movie, but it's miles ahead of "Bender's Game" (which is just horrid) and not too far behind BBS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Meerkat54

Urban Legend
  
|
|
 |
« #491 : 01-14-2012 07:32 »
« : 01-14-2012 07:35 »
|
|
It's an old Futurama movie
What do you mean?
I mean it came out around about 5 years ago or so. Making it "old", seeing as the movie itself was like a sequel to, "Bender's Big Score". I don't mind the more modern ones though, as they have a bit more humor in them. Meh...BWABB has too much sugestive sexulity and violence.
But Fry was the real star in this movie...not like he deserved it.
First you say you liked the movie, then you say it has too much sexual scenes and violence. Interesting...
|
|
|
|
|
|
coldangel

DOOP Secretary

|
|
 |
« #493 : 01-14-2012 09:52 »
|
|
I mean it came out around about 5 years ago or so. Making it "old", seeing as the movie itself was like a sequel to, "Bender's Big Score". I don't mind the more modern ones though, as they have a bit more humor in them.
Um... they all came out in the 2000s. 2008/2009 to be precise. They're all new. They're certainly all modern.Jesus, how young are you? At this stage, films made in the early to mid 90s can be considered old. Anything after that is a fairly recent release, or at the very least modern. 2000s is new. The Futurama movies all came out near enough to the same time, over a period of only about a year and a half. In a practical sense they are all the same age. To quibble over a period of only a few months is just stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tedward

Professor

|
|
 |
« #495 : 01-14-2012 16:48 »
|
|
Besides, Meerkat, saying that it's old but you "love it anyway" makes it sound like the movie being old is a negative thing. People may talk about the old run vs. the new run of episodes of Futurama, but I don't think anyone would consider the fact that the original episodes came first as anything negative.
And speaking of which, I don't think of the original run as particularly "old" but have no problem calling it the old run because, relative to the new run, that's what it is. The movies were released consecutively, however, so although the one you mentioned is older than two of them, there's nothing separating these movies into a group of "the old ones" and "the new ones" (and you can think of BwaBB as a sequel to BBS and group those together as you did, sure, but BG and ItWGY don't have that same connection).
Yes, we've just reacted to the way you presented your opinion about the show rather than to the opinion itself. Welcome to PEEL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
  
|
|
 |
« #501 : 01-15-2012 04:21 »
|
|
Having just gone through this entire thread to see how many people agreed with my ranking, I found that there was only ONE person who posted the ranking that I would put (some poster named Roger).
I just sifted through this entire thread and not a single person seems to agree with my rankings. And just to clarify, those rankings are: 1. Bender's Big Score 2. The Beast with a Billion Backs 3. Bender's Game 4. Into the Wild Green Yonder The order in which they were released.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
  
|
|
 |
« #508 : 01-15-2012 13:41 »
|
|
Why is ITWGY so low for you, turnip?
More than anything, I don't find it very funny (by Futurama's standards)- which is something I'd also say about 'Bender's Big Score' - but I adore the story in 'Bender's Big Score' and feel that it's good enough to make up for a slight lack of laughs. But also, I hate the story in 'Into the Wild Green Yonder'. The whole plot falls down for me on the grounds that who cares if they manage to bring back all extinct life when I'm not even convinced that it's ethically right to do so. Fry, himself, points out that they "failed nature's test". It's supposed to be a big, epic storyline about them saving all life in the universe because the dark one will supposedly slowly but surely destroy all life, but who cares? It's taken the dark ones 2 billion years to destroy as much as life as they had done and now there's only one of them left. And they're clearly not much of a threat given that Leo Wong killed all but one of them inadvertently with some concrete. All life in the entire universe is eventually going to go extinct (as proven in 'The Late Philip J. Fry') so does it really matter if they've still got billions of years on the clock? I also hate how disjointed the first act is, I hate Snoop Dogg's guest appearance, I find a lot of the locations/characters quite bland (the supreme court isn't the most interesting of places and it's something I felt that we'd seen enough of in the show before, anyway). And whilst I loved the final scene, I felt as if it was tacked on. But yes... its biggest folly is just not being all that funny, if you ask me. And I should add that I actually really quite like 'The Beast with a Billion Backs' and 'Bender's Game'. For all their flaws, they're both every bit as funny as I ever expect 'Futurama' to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inquisitor Hein
Liquid Emperor
 
|
|
 |
« #510 : 01-15-2012 14:04 »
|
|
Why is ITWGY so low for you, turnip?
But also, I hate the story in 'Into the Wild Green Yonder'. The whole plot falls down for me on the grounds that who cares if they manage to bring back all extinct life when I'm not even convinced that it's ethically right to do so. Fry, himself, points out that they "failed nature's test".
^This. There should have been a difference between "species failing the test of evolution" and "species passing the test of evolution, but being unrightfully removed by the dark one"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|