Chay got priapism from Tron: Legacy - Upcoming Films thread

[Reply #80 on:]

Ahem.  Moving on...

I previously posted, in this thread or another, about my buddy who told me he'd just reviewed the script for the sequel to The Big Lebowski.  I derided it as indicative of the total lack of any new idea creativity in hollywood.  Well, I spoke to my buddy, and he said he heard it just got greenlit to be made.  My question is, why?  From what I was told, the Coens and Jeff Bridges might not be part of the project; WTF?  I hope it's my buddy pulling my leg; if it's not, it's bewildering.  I just hope a trailer for that abomination doesn't show up here in the upcoming films thread as a topic of discussion.  That would just be too painful...

[Reply #81 on:]

On the other hand, what about Pixar's Toy Story, Monsters, Inc., Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Ratatouille, WALL•E, & Up?

Oh come on, cartoons don't count.
But I'll give you that - animated things have a greater tendency toward originality. Perhaps because of the fact that you can do literally anything with animation. Maz notes that despite this, they all still flog the same old tired themes and morality though.

The Dark Knight is an example....based on a comic, but done really, really well.

That movie sucked! Bring back Robin, I say. And Mr. Freeze!
And how come Batman doesn't dance anymore?!

[Reply #82 on:]

Coldy, for 5 PEEL points, name the dance Batman does...

[Reply #83 on:]

...Batdance?

[Reply #84 on:]

That was Prince dressed up as Batman and the Joker.

[Reply #85 on:]

Batman isn't effeminate enough to do the Batdance.  He danced the Bat-tusi.

[Reply #86 on:]

"the same old tired [...] morality though."

You'd prefer fresh, new morality?

[Reply #87 on:]

Times have changed. It's no longer love thy neighbour. These days it's 'avoid eye contact with your neighbours and pretend you couldn't hear them having sex last night through the paper thin wall/ceiling'. Kids need to learn these things somehow!

[Reply #88 on:]

If that van's a-rockin, don't go a-knocking.

[Reply #89 on:]

Times have changed. It's no longer love thy neighbour. These days it's 'avoid eye contact with your neighbours and pretend you couldn't hear them having sex last night through the paper thin wall/ceiling'. Kids need to learn these things somehow!

Are you talking in generalities or from personal experience?

[Reply #90 on:]

OMG OMG OMG TREE OF LIFE TRAILER

[Reply #91 on:]

New Battle: Los Angeles trailer is pretty awesome, this time I'm sure no uploading of a virus to the mothership crap will happen...

[Reply #92 on:]

The first shot of Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man

[Reply #93 on:]

I saw this today on Yahoo, lots of people were gripping about a remake/reboot/rewhatever. Yeah it's unnecessary, but I'll watch it just to see a new Spider-Man movie. I like it. Can't be any worse than part 3.

[Reply #94 on:]

I disagree. Expect it to be a lot worse than Spider-Man 3.

[Reply #95 on:]

Toby McGuire too expensive now?  And who will play Mary Jane?

Maybe they should just be making another Bond movie instead....unless they already are...I'm too lazy to search.

[Reply #96 on:]

wow, you're really far behind...

Sam Raimi withdrew from the project cause he wanted to use some less popular antagonists for Spidey and the studio didn't.
So Sony got a new director and instead of continuing said they'd reboot it with:
Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker
Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy
Rhys Ifans as The Lizard
Martin Sheen as Ben Parker
Sally Field as May Parker
Denis Leary as Captain George Stacy
Chris Zylka as Eugene "Flash" Thompson
Irrfan Khan as Van Adder
Annie Parisse as Van Adder's wife
Campbell Scott as Richard Parker
Julianne Nicholson as Mary Parker
C. Thomas Howell as Ray
Miles Elliot as Billy Connors

So no Mary Jane it seems, but Peter's parents... and in 3-D


New Bond will also be out in 2012...

[Reply #97 on:]

Re: Spidey.

No Mary Jane. Good.

Including parents. Bad (unless it is somehow back story).

Lizard. Awesome, if it's done right.

[Reply #98 on:]

3-D. Fuck no!

[Reply #99 on:]

But if they finally do the lizard I will have a hard on in anticipation. But I'm sure it will fall flaccid if they fail to capture the scope of that villain's ambitions and go for the "Torment" Lizard. But I bet they do, based on that image released.

Limp penis is anticipated.

[Reply #100 on:]

well, if lizards give you a hard-on you do need some help

[Reply #101 on:]

No Mary Jane, but Gwen Stacy and her father...looks like they're possibly gonna do the Gwen Stacy neckbreak story.

[Reply #102 on:]

Plus the casting for the 3 spiderman movies actually sucked dick.  I'm just sayin'.
Except for Bruce Campbell cameos.  Bruce Campbell should have a cameo in all movies.

And spiderman 3 blew big chunks of testicles.... so this actually has a decent chance of being better, despite the fact that it's utterly retarded.  How about another Hulk reboot while we're at it?

[Reply #103 on:]

If they re-do Spiderman, they better make sure that Parker builds gadgets to shoot webs this time, instead of shooting semen from his wrists.

[Reply #104 on:]

Anne Hathaway is the new Catwoman, Tom Hardy is the new Bane... discuss.

Personally of the rumoured shortlist (Eva Green, Naomi Watts, Keira Knightley, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Biel, Kate Mara, Charlotte Riley and Gemma Arterton) I was hoping for one of the first two as they seem the most fitting to me as the feline seductress... but Anne Hathaway, I dunno...

And the whole rumour of Hardy playing Hugo Strange was interesting to me too as it would be a new character for movie Batman to face off against.
Hmmm!

[Reply #105 on:]

How about another Hulk reboot while we're at it?

Well actually, since the Hulk has been recast again for The Avengers, that kind of counts as another reboot.

[Reply #106 on:]

Don't worry, they will be rebooted several times.  You see, by 2100, they have already remade all films at least 5 times.  I dunno what sort of craze there will be by 2050.  3D again?  Now silent films?  Or smell-o-vision?

[Reply #107 on:]

The Hulk is being rebooted.  I guess the 3rd reboot is considered the lucky one.

[Reply #108 on:]

If they re-do Spiderman, they better make sure that Parker builds gadgets to shoot webs this time, instead of shooting semen from his wrists.

I disagree.  I think that was the most logical change when they movie'd up that franchise, and it's one of the few things I actually thought was rather decent.  I'll also readily admit that the only time I saw the second movie I felt that it was actually a good film. 

However, I can certainly see why you made such a post, and most certainly any actual comic nerds would agree with 110% since the mutation to shoot webs is definitely not canon.  I was willing to ignore that because it made more sense to me than the take on Peter somehow developing his own magic web shooting concoction.  I mean.... he already has spider ability to climb on walls, why not give him mutant organs too?  Also, considering that Stan Lee was on board with the movies, I can't see how the creator was distraught with the change.

Anne Hathaway is the new Catwoman, Tom Hardy is the new Bane... discuss.

Personally of the rumoured shortlist (Eva Green, Naomi Watts, Keira Knightley, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Biel, Kate Mara, Charlotte Riley and Gemma Arterton) I was hoping for one of the first two as they seem the most fitting to me as the feline seductress... but Anne Hathaway, I dunno...

And the whole rumour of Hardy playing Hugo Strange was interesting to me too as it would be a new character for movie Batman to face off against.
Hmmm!

Do you think we'll be able to get a glimpse of Hathaway's tits this time?  Also, as weird a choice as that would be for her to play Catwoman, sounds like they're going with good odds.  1 out of 1 for Brokeback Mountain cast to play villains in Batman movies isn't half bad. 

Hopefully Bane doesn't get written out to be utterly retarded like that one Batman movie...

And lastly.... how about a Harley for good measure?  They're also going to have their work cut out for them writing out Heath since he went and took sleep AIDS while no one was looking.

[Reply #109 on:]

At first I thought Bane was an odd choice of character for Tom Hardy to play. Then I was told about when he was in Bonson and now I can see it working

[Reply #110 on:]

I was willing to ignore that because it made more sense to me than the take on Peter somehow developing his own magic web shooting concoction.

I'm with winna. In The Amazing Spider-Man (1977), they did have him make his own web concoction, and I always wondered how a college student did that without lots of money or years of development. It may have been canon, but didn't work well on screen.

[Reply #111 on:]

http://uk.ign.com/videos/2011/01/12/drive-angry-red-band-clip-xxx-gun-fight

lol (and NSFW)

[Reply #112 on:]

Li9nky no worky.

And judging from the URL, it's Nic Cage's sexgunfight from Drive Angry.  Shoot 'Em Up's was better.

[Reply #113 on:]

Do you think we'll be able to get a glimpse of Hathaway's tits this time?

I mean, we've seen them before. Doubt they'd whip them out for Batman being a sorta-family film.

[Reply #114 on:]

I was willing to ignore that because it made more sense to me than the take on Peter somehow developing his own magic web shooting concoction.

I'm with winna. In The Amazing Spider-Man (1977), they did have him make his own web concoction, and I always wondered how a college student did that without lots of money or years of development. It may have been canon, but didn't work well on screen.

He's supposed to be ridiculously intelligent as well from what I've gathered.... so it's possible that he could do those things, and I believe he had access to a lab.... but I find the plausibility lacking.  Even by comic book logic, spider organs that produce webs seems more probable than make your own web-concoction... especially since he's a spider mutant man--some sort of... spider-man.

[Reply #115 on:]

He's supposed to be ridiculously intelligent as well from what I've gathered.... so it's possible that he could do those things, and I believe he had access to a lab....

Because he's a fucking scientist. You didn't gather that from the movies? They downplay it sure, but he's going to college to become a scientist. In the comics he owns his own lab at some point, I'm pretty sure.

[Reply #116 on:]

Actually, I looked it up on wikipedia and apparently only some of the comic series featuring spiders included the backstory of him being in college and studying science, but not necessarily the original.  Hence the reason I speculated what I said above because I couldn't tell if it was canon in all variations of spiderman; btw, it's not.  In fact, a lot of them start off with Peter Parker as a teenager, which was the prominent feature that led him to being such a popular icon in the first place.

[Reply #117 on:]

Found this on Wikipedia: "One biologist on the History Channel’s Spider-Man Tech suggested that it would be more plausible for Spider-Man to shoot webbing from the Submandibular gland beneath the tongue instead of from his forearms."

So Spidey would go around vomiting on everything. Way to reduce the character hero appeal, Mister Biologist. 

[Reply #118 on:]

It could be worse.  It could come out where silk usually comes out of a spider.

[Reply #119 on:]