besmovie u cant wait for

[on:]

spider man i think

[Reply #1 on:]

I guess Star Wars Epidode II although I'll wait for it to come to video.

[Reply #2 on:]

Where's Men In Black II? Out of the choices I'll vote Spiderman because I want to see how the film compares to the ride.

[Reply #3 on:]

Star Wars Episode 2. Yay!

[Reply #4 on:]

Episode II (I've already seen Spidey, and X2 is far enough away that I'm barely thinking about it). But where's Star Trek: Nemesis?

[Reply #5 on:]

I put Episode Two 'cos I too have already seen Spider-Man and "Eight-Legged Freaks" wasn't on the list.   
Plus I doubt Shadowcat's gonna be in X-Men 2.  They only gave her one line in the original.     Give Kitty Pryde a chance! 

[Reply #6 on:]

She is a teenaged, wide mouthed frog!
Where was Nightcrawler? That is what I want to know. And where was Collossus? Probably ommitted because they would be hard to costume, it was the same with Hank (the Beast), he would have looked like a guy in a blue furry suit.

[Reply #7 on:]

Where is The Lord Of The Rings: The Two Towers? Well, I guess I will go with Episode 2.

[Reply #8 on:]

All rumor at this point, but I keep hearing that Nightcrawler, Gambit and/or Beast are joining the cast of X2. I doubt it will be Nightcrawler AND Beast--you can't add TOO many characters, and two blue-black-full-body-haired wallclimbers appearing simultaneously might be a little much...the non-reader audience will think they're somehow related.

Colussus got whacked recently, probably because his ability to transform his flesh into "organic steel"--and still move--was credibility-straining even for a comic-book, and far too much so for a movie. You can bet Marvel's keeping the roster up-to-date with movies in mind now, bay-bee...

Kitty would give Storm something to do besides be a third wheel, and the Storm/Kitty 'ship was a fan favorite...however, Rogue is currently covering the "young novice" role on the team, and the first movie's cast was already uncomfortably divided (normal-looking = good, weird-looking = evil) as it was, so adding Nightcrawler would be better. In fact, with Rogue's fear of assuming someone's "ugly" form along with their power, she's better to play off against Nightcrawler than Kitty is, and Nightcrawler would be more likely to react dramatically than Hank (Beast)...

[Reply #9 on:]

Hmm, maybe I ought to see that there x-men movie some day.

I'll just vote for "Episode II", but I agree with the Space Pope. Where is "Star Trek: Nemesis"?

And "Men In Black 2" (thansk Otis) and "LOTR II" (nods to Mr. Potter)?

"Men In Black" was one of the coolest movies of that year. Tomme Lee Jones is one hell of an actor, and the effects was pretty neat.

"Scooby Doo"? ::Sideshow Bob shudder::

[Reply #10 on:]

 

Originally posted by Teral:
LOTR II

::Hacks off Teral's legs::

The Two Towers, you neanderthal!

[Reply #11 on:]

Oh my goodness, no, Nixie. Did you not hear? The Two Towers is offensive! There's even an online petition to this effect, competing with "ours." If Peter Jackson is allowed to name his next movie The Two Towers--then Evil wins!!!     

"People is the craziest monkeys!!" 

Edit: Here is the actual petition. Even if this is for real--who can tell anymore?--most of the signatures are obviously making fun of it, and a disclaimer has been added since I looked at it last, explaining the FREAKING OBVIOUS. Here's the text of the petition, with the stunner in boldface:

"Those of us who have seen The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring know what an amazing director Peter Jackson is. When I learned that there apparently was to be a sequel, I was overjoyed. However, Peter Jackson has decided to tastelessly name the sequel "The Two Towers". The title is clearly meant to refer to the attacks on the World Trade Center. In this post-September 11 world, it is unforgiveable that this should be allowed to happen. The idea is both offensive and morally repugnant. Hopefully, when Peter Jackson and, more importantly, New Line Cinema see the number of signatures on this petition, the title will be changed to something a little more sensitive."

              

EDIT EDIT: Most of the signatures have been voided, most of the remaining are gags. Shocker: some are dead serious. My personal favorite:

1162. Darcy Brennan: Ludicrous, but somehow meaningful.

Yeah...somehow.

[Reply #12 on:]

They're making a third Scary Movie?  As if a sequel was bad enough...

[Reply #13 on:]

Every day, my opinion of the human race drops more and more

[Reply #14 on:]

 

Originally posted by bartman:
besmovie u cant wait for

Doesn't anyone care about proper punctuation, capitalization, and spelling anymore? My minor was in English, and it's somewhat appalling to see that these things are dead on the Internet nowadays. Oh well, I voted for Episode II.

[Reply #15 on:]

AthlonXP, you've been here long enough to answer your own question. Everyone makes mistakes, but golly-oh-jeez-oh-man! Not only do most people NOT giv enuf of 1 crap to splle rite R be coheerent, BUT most of them are proud of it, as if they were creating a new language, like Ebonics or Underleg Noises.

People With Frontal Lobes: The Dying Breed.

[Reply #16 on:]

 

Originally posted by BrainSluggo:
"Those of us who have seen The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring know what an amazing director Peter Jackson is. When I learned that there apparently was to be a sequel, I was overjoyed. However, Peter Jackson has decided to tastelessly name the sequel "The Two Towers". The title is clearly meant to refer to the attacks on the World Trade Center. In this post-September 11 world, it is unforgiveable that this should be allowed to happen. The idea is both offensive and morally repugnant."

Friends, we should all get behind this cause. We can't let Peter Jackson get away with such callous disrespect for our need to sugarcoat the world for stupid people. The morons of the world must be protected from the actions of a director who is so depraved, he actually went back in time to force JRR Tolkien to dump his original title ("Dude, Where's My Ring?") and rename it as an insult to victims of a disaster that would not even occur for fifty years! Truly, Peter Jackson must be hunted down and beaten to death with a used poodle.

[Reply #17 on:]

 

Originally posted by Nixorbo:
Every day, my opinion of the human race drops more and more

Cynicism: It's what's for dinner.

[Reply #18 on:]

anyone who votes for scary movie 3 should die.

30 days until i see spider-man...

[Reply #19 on:]

Anyone who votes for Scary Movie 3 should be forced to watch it. Oh wait, TSN-Bot covered that already. (PS: I think your name is fine! I don't understand what it means, but I like it.)

[Reply #20 on:]

 

Originally posted by BrainSluggo:
Kitty would give Storm something to do besides be a third wheel, and the Storm/Kitty 'ship was a fan favorite...however, Rogue is currently covering the "young novice" role on the team, and the first movie's cast was already uncomfortably divided (normal-looking = good, weird-looking = evil) as it was, so adding Nightcrawler would be better. In fact, with Rogue's fear of assuming someone's "ugly" form along with their power, she's better to play off against Nightcrawler than Kitty is, and Nightcrawler would be more likely to react dramatically than Hank (Beast)...

Playing on what the Kid's WB 'toon shows us, but... I personally don't think Kitty's a novice.  Yeah, she's a little...Valley-girly, but she's one of the background characters that can serve as peacemaker.  She's friends with Rogue, the rebel/novice, it seems, and has a weird connection to Wolverine.  She's the "friend to all" type.  Plus, she's got good chemistry with Nightcrawler as he seems to be her closest friend, though she and Rogue are getting there.  At any rate, I'd want Kitty and Nightcrawler to have at least a one minute cameo each.  Maybe in the same scene, perhaps?  Sorry, my shipper side kicking in...  
Oh, I read at upcomingmovies.com that Nightcrawler looks to be the no. 1 new mutant to be added...

[Reply #21 on:]

That's probably so (I haven't seen the 'toon at all and haven't read the book since before there were X-Amount Of Spin-Off Titles), but the movie has its own independent continuity, where Kitty is (as of the first movie, anyway) still just a student, Iceman hasn't been part of the "strike team" yet, and Beast and Nightcrawler and Angel aren't even around (visibly, anyway), and much much more. The movie's continuity is bound to remain separate from that of the book and any of the animated series, so anything goes...

I should've been clearer: the Novice Character is a vital plot device. Fry is (was) a Novice Character, and through him we were introduced to the madhouse that will be the 30th Century. Had the pilot just started off with Leela pulling out her career chip and doing some kind of Mary Tyler Moore hat-tossing dance in Times Squared (Welcome...to the future!!), we would have been SO lost. (I'm sure you realize this, I'm just generalizing the discussion. And babbling again.)

Unlike, say, the Justice League, the X-Men are an ever-changing group of characters who rarely stand out on their own. (Say "Superman" and almost everyone knows the basic story. Say "Phoenix" and most people say "Arizona.&quot Because of this, every so often writers need to bring in a "newbie" so that he/she--and new readers--can catch up on who does what and how. This was especially important for the X-Men movie, which had to introduce--to an audience that included lots of non-readers of the comics--characters that had a variety of abilities and backgrounds which had to be catalogued and wrapped up (or jettisoned) before we could move on to the main story. Therefore, like it or not, Rogue--and Wolverine, too--became the Novice Characters, and Rogue got a lot younger and less powerful in the bargain.

I imagine Rogue was chosen over Kitty for the sake of drama; all Kitty has to do is NOT run through walls and she passes for "normal." Rogue is denied basic human contact because of her mutation, and she's dangerous to others through no fault of her own, which is a lot heavier. But the big, involved comic-book subplot detailing how Rogue wound up with the powers of flight and super-strength (swiped permanently from a minor superhero), and her original past as a member of the Brotherhood (Mystique was her adoptive mother!) had to be flushed for the sake of keeping the movie focused and under three hours.

Fans may get enraged over widespread changes like this to their favorite books/characters, but they're very often necessary. The funny thing is, on the rare occasion that the movie is successful, these changes are wedged back into the comic (as much as possible). Batman largely lost the Bat-Trunks (although they reappear off and on); I've seen the X-Men are edging away from shoot-me-here yellow spandex in favor of black leather; all the odd stuff in the wildly-popular DC miniseries Kingdom Come--which is often suggested for filming but is simply impossible for non-readers to access--is gradually becoming the DC Universe Standard.

Oh, dear, Uncle BrainSluggo's babbled on again...I've missed my Metamucil!!

[Reply #22 on:]

 

Originally posted by BrainSluggo:
Oh my goodness, no, Nixie. Did you not hear? The Two Towers is offensive! There's even an online petition to this effect, competing with "ours." If Peter Jackson is allowed to name his next movie The Two Towers--then Evil wins!!!       

I've posted a reply there.  What a moron!

[Reply #23 on:]

I agree, Peter Jackson is a moron. I'm not even American and I think it is disgusting and offensive that they would name a movie that. It's obviously a blatant money-grab by New Line and I think the film (as well as the book it's based on) should at least renamed, if not withheld from release all together.

[Reply #24 on:]

 

Originally posted by Ben:
I agree, Peter Jackson is a moron. I'm not even American and I think it is disgusting and offensive that they would name a movie that. It's obviously a blatant money-grab by New Line and I think the film (as well as the book it's based on) should at least renamed, if not withheld from release all together.

You're joking, aren't you?  This is just the latest example of how the world's whipped itself into a state of paranoia/hysteria following 9/11.  Contrary to what the papers said the day after the tragedy, the world hasn't come to an end, besides which, life has to go on.

[Reply #25 on:]

I 'm waiting for Star Trek: Nemesis and X-Men 2

[Reply #26 on:]

   

Originally posted by PCC Fred:
 You're joking, aren't you?  This is just the latest example of how the world's whipped itself into a state of paranoia/hysteria following 9/11.  Contrary to what the papers said the day after the tragedy, the world hasn't come to an end, besides which, life has to go on.

Indeed. Besides, as the disclaimer added (belatedly) to the petition states, The Two Towers is the long-established title of a book written AGES ago. It...has...NOTHING...to...do. ..with...September...Eleventh . Follow the link and read for yourself. PetitionOnline.com put up the disclaimer; they can't help it if knuckleknobs with more mouth than mind put crud up--if they did, you'd never hear the end of it over "censorship."

EDIT: Oh hell, I'll just put it up--here's the disclaimer (bolds and italics are mine):

"Please Note: The Two Towers is the title of the JRR Tolkien book originally published in 1954, the second book of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. The title was thus established some 47 years prior to the attacks on the World Trade Center towers, and there is no evidence to suggest that Peter Jackson meant anything by continuing the same title other than faithfulness to the beloved Tolkien classics. Furthermore, the two distant, opposing towers in the Tolkien classic have very little if anything in common with the two matching towers of the World Trade Center. — PetitionOnline.com"

"God help us...in the future."
--Criswell

[Reply #27 on:]

 

Originally posted by Nixorbo:
  ::Hacks off Teral's legs::

The Two Towers, you neanderthal!

'Tis but a scratch.

Okay, no need to beat a dead horse any more. But this whole business with the "Two Towers" just goes to prove that there is one born every minute.

[Reply #28 on:]

  Yep, I agree with

a)  People who want the new LOTR movie to be up there.

b)  Anyone who isn't a politician (especially a conservative one)

c)  Anyone who will feed me - please, please send me food. 

[Reply #29 on:]

 

Originally posted by PCC Fred:
 You're joking, aren't you?

Satire's a lost art, Ben

[Reply #30 on:]

This thread's turning into one giant Brass Eye special.

[Reply #31 on:]

 

Originally posted by Kryten:
The morons of the world must be protected from the actions of a director who is so depraved, he actually went back in time to force JRR Tolkien to dump his original title ("Dude, Where's My Ring?&quot and rename it as an insult to victims of a disaster that would not even occur for fifty years! Truly, Peter Jackson must be hunted down and beaten to death with a used poodle.

Dude, where's my ring? Priceless 
Used poodle.... hahahehhheee (and breathe) hahahahhahaaaaa....
Spaeking of Brass Eye Specials and crimes against humour, I could not believe the mentality of the people who slammed the peadophile special. How can they take it serioulsy when it claims peadophiles dress as schools to lure in children?!?!?
Shoot these morons into the sun.
...used poodle...

[Reply #32 on:]

Honestly, I think Peter Jackson should keep the title. I know some people say it's offensive, but I think it's good that a filmmaker is out there to challenge us and push the envelope. If we make Jackson change the title, then the terrorists have already won!

[Reply #33 on:]

 

Originally posted by Nixorbo:
 Satire's a lost art, Ben

I know.

[Reply #34 on:]

And if we make Jackson change the title  hundreds of Lord Of The Rings fans(including me) would be very dissapointed.

[Reply #35 on:]

I kinda want to see xman 2 and spider man 2 now    ep 2 will be ok i guess.