Moments when a piece of entertainment completely lost you.

Shrapnel · Post by **Shrapnel** » Mon Nov 03, 2014 8:31 pm

hyzmarca wrote:
Shrapnel wrote:When did the Kirk thing happen? I don't remember that at all.
Generations.

Ooohhhh, right, right.

The last time I saw that movie was when Clinton banged an office secretary, so that might explain why I forgot.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:18 am

http://www.mcmass.com/

I-

this-

.....

I think I need to go lie down.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:26 pm

"Oh Saint McDonald had a sect, ee ay ee ay oo..."

Reynard · Post by **Reynard** » Sat Dec 06, 2014 9:20 pm

I am actually tempted to donate, just to see it happen. Except there is less than $500 out of million collected.

Not this time, it seems.

Starmaker · Post by **Starmaker** » Mon Dec 08, 2014 1:57 pm

Reynard wrote:I am actually tempted to donate, just to see it happen. Except there is less than $500 out of million collected.

Not this time, it seems.

It's flexible funding on indiegogo, meaning that if you donate, they pocket your money straight away forever (as opposed to fixed funding on indiegogo, where your money is refunded if they don't make it, as opposed to kickstarter where they only charge after the campaign successfully ends).

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Sun Dec 21, 2014 8:25 pm

So I saw the Hobbit finale.

And I get that the Hobbit movies have a lot of spectacle. That's fine. I won't object to some flashy moves and shiny things in my movies (Thanduil and Thorin both had some blingy armor).

But this ended up detracting from it. There's some mounts--Thanduil rides his moose, Dain had a warpig--and that's cool. Except that out of nowhere, in the middle of the Battle of Five Armies, a bunch of armored wargoats show up right when Thorin wants to go kill Azog. Big huge horns, armored barding, all that.

There's some physics-defying moves--like someone going up through ice he'd been floating under just after.

And there's a bit with a cart that's just very video gamey. Guy jumps in a cart, and it just takes off to wheel-rattling speed with no pushoff or anything.

It was really distracting. There's a few hammy lines--one real clunker towards the end, you'll know it when you see it--but there was also some good really good moments. Thorin and Bilbo having a talk about acorns comes to mind. But the action and the narrative convenience just got too glaringly obvious.

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Sun Dec 21, 2014 8:51 pm

The thing that bothered me the most about Battle of Five Armies was how little conclusion there was. Bard just drops out of the story mid-battle. You don't see Erebor and Dale even starting to come back to life. The action sequences are indulgent but the actual narrative is perfunctory.

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Sun Dec 21, 2014 9:06 pm

Ooh, very true. Didn't show them entombing the Arkenstone or what became of a lot of characters. But we had some glorious slow-mo of Legolas running up the falling stones of a collapsing tower-bridge.

erik · Post by **erik** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 12:30 am

I'm a bit behind, just watched the second hobbit movie, and was almost as disappointed as the first. Thankfully I wasn't irritated to grinding teeth with a pointless rabbit sled chase but whenever the dwarves have a fight scene it doesn't feel fun and actiony, it is unbelievably contrived and stupid. Goblin Town, escape from the Silvan Elves and Orcs, vs. Smaug. They're terrible, just terrible.

Not really feeling the desire to watch the battle of 5 armies. Each Hobbit movie I watch makes me like Lord of the Rings less.

RufusCorvus · Post by **RufusCorvus** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 6:36 am

I left Battle of Five Armies convinced that the story would have been better served following the original plan and making it two movies. All of the Hobbit movies sag in ways that Lord of the Rings never did, despite those movies being longer.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 6:54 am

See, to me the LotR movies were nearly interminable. They dragged on and bored. I much better enjoyed the Hobbit movies, even if they were pure popcorn.

Now, I don't ask much of movies, save that they be entertaining, and I've not read much of the books (as stated elsewhere, I've read about 80-90% of each of the Hobbit and Fellowship), so take that as you will. But, seriously, American movies are generally pretty much the same, and it's more a matter of how dumb or boring are they, because they will seldom, if ever, be particularly insightful, intelligent or inspirational.

Whipstitch · Post by **Whipstitch** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 7:09 am

Posts like that just make me roll my eyes and furiously make the wanker gesture.

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 7:22 am

Whipstitch wrote:Posts like that just make me roll my eyes and furiously make the wanker gesture.

Agreed.

I don't object to the spectacle. I object to the total asspull of some things--like the battlegoats--and the non-closure of some story arcs.

It's an enjoyable movie while you're in the theater, mostly. But the lack of basic storytelling jars me like sloppy mechanics in a TTRPG. It's seriously not hard to have a two-minute scene showing them closing the lid on the Arkenstone and then Dain saying something that shows the gold isn't corrupting him, like, "Now give it to some o' those bloody men and elves, they did a day's work," with Bard at the head of the army of Men. They could have cut out the bit where Legolas ran up the falling stones, or one of Legolas' run-ins with Bolg.

It's shoddy worksmanship.

Count Arioch the 28th · Mon Dec 22, 2014 8:07 am

It is no shock to anyone that I have incredibly low standards in general when it comes to life, but what the fuck was with the giant worms? And couldn't they have been useful later in the battle? I could forgive it if there was a giant worm fight scene somewhere.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 9:41 am

Yeah, I'm more bothered by the fact that the wyrms basically disappeared than I am that battle goats suddenly showed up, since I just kind of figure the battle goats were part of the dwarven army that showed up and just not shown before that scene.

Count Arioch the 28th · Mon Dec 22, 2014 12:38 pm

Prak wrote:Yeah, I'm more bothered by the fact that the wyrms basically disappeared than I am that battle goats suddenly showed up, since I just kind of figure the battle goats were part of the dwarven army that showed up and just not shown before that scene.

Someone on 4chan managed to find a few frames where Dain's champions were riding them, but it's a "blink and you miss it" type of thing.

EDIT: Also, does anyone think that after seeing Dain that someone owes GW some money? He looked like a Troll Slayer and a Chaos Dwarf had a baby then pissed on it.

Pseudo Stupidity · Post by **Pseudo Stupidity** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:36 pm

I tried to watch the second Hobbit movie after hating the first one (it was on HBO and I had a free HBO subscription, so whatever), and I couldn't even finish it. It's like Jackson forgot what pacing was or that CGI isn't required for every fucking scene, or even that the book was fun and interesting.

One weird thing that bothered me:

One of the best parts of the book is Bilbo singing a song to piss off the spiders as he runs around stabbing them and freeing dwarves. You'd think Jackson would be all over that because it was goofy and actiony, but he took that out. It was just a stupid action scene where everyone beat up spiders. Then later he had Legolas jump off dwarves' heads to get across the river or something.

Did Jackson just get lucky with LoTR? Because every decision he makes seems horrible. The pacing is the main reason I disliked the movie and entirely the reason for me not finishing it, but what the fuck? He should not be this bad.

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 12:20 am

The other two films he's directed since LotR are King Kong and The Lovely Bones. I haven't watched The Lovely Bones, but it was not well-received. I have watched King Kong, and I would not say it was well-paced or well-directed. Two films and a trilogy is a pretty small sample size, but I suspect if you were to guess that Peter Jackson's career is a hill on which he is currently the wrong side of, history would eventually validate you.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 12:52 am

Peter Jackson is a monster and gore guy, remember that possibly his most well-known movie pre-LotR was a zombie movie where a guy uses a lawnmower to barge through a bunch of zombies, and his King Kong was actually more notable for all the crazy monsters he populated Skull Island with and there's an art book of them. I don't know why he was picked for LotR/Hobbit, but there you go.

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:21 am

The Hobbit trilogy has been subject to quite a bit more studio meddling than LotR. I'm sure Jackson made his share of questionable decisions, but apparently the merchandizing leeches are also responsible for some.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:31 am

That makes sense. I mean, I'll admit, if the marketing department figured out a way to actually engineer battle goats and sell kids as Hobbit merch, I would be so down for having a pet battle goat. Given that's unfeasible...

erik · Post by **erik** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:36 am

"I don't know why he was picked for LotR/Hobbit, but there you go."

Lucky connections, timing and a bit of pretending to be more sought-after than he really was when wooing the studio. That and he really wanted it too.

To be fair to LotR, the vision of the setting was outstanding. He was also wildly successful. Even as complimentary-catheter length movies, LotR were decently paced and all around solid fantasy movies. Fantasy movies don't typically make blockbusters so he did an awesome job. It is no surprise that he was picked for Hobbit.

Unfortunately the Hobbit is Jackson's Phantom Menace. It's a fuckin disgrace.

The actors are all doing a fine job in the films. It comes down to the shitty writing, choreography, CGI-love and pacing. A lot of that lands on Jackson's shoulders.

Whipstitch · Post by **Whipstitch** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 3:14 am

angelfromanotherpin wrote:The Hobbit trilogy has been subject to quite a bit more studio meddling than LotR. I'm sure Jackson made his share of questionable decisions, but apparently the merchandizing leeches are also responsible for some.

While it's true the production process has been more of a trial it's debatable how much that absolves Jackson of blame given that the New Zealand production company he founded is intimately involved with these projects. It's impossible to say from the outside how much he was fighting for purely artistic considerations when you consider that these projects are far more than just a cottage industry for him and his buddies at this point. He tried pawning off director duties but eventually took the chair himself for reasons I would have to believe are largely financial.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:34 pm

I'm also not sure how much influence Guillermo Del Toro had on the screenplay. I can definitely see his style in many of the scenes in the first two Hobbit movies. I might be imagining it but his style imprint seems there.

Shatner · Post by **Shatner** » Wed Dec 31, 2014 4:25 am

Just got back from watching the Hobbit part 3 and it was pretty terrible. In addition to the many issues already mentioned, it featured an annoying amount of mook bowling (a hero charges into a formation of sixty enemy soldiers and basically pushes them out of the way, maybe decapitating a few in slow motion for good measure). I'm fine having the Legolas flip around like a ninja and pounce-kill shit, and I'm fine with Bard wagon-charging a troll because having named characters do flashy moves to kill scary monsters is about as genre-appropriate as it gets. But I don't like it when the bearded schlubs we watched get chased across Middle Earth for the previous six hours turn around and start smashing through orcish heavy infantry like they're the fucking Cool Aid man. Having armies duke it out and protagonists rack up dozens of kills amidst the melee? Fine. Having one dude on pig/elk/ram/horseback charge through a legion and kill everything that gets within arms reach when they AREN'T a god-king wearing a Ring of Power? Bad.

Latest Film
"Goblin mercenaries, no more than a hundred." - a dwarf
"You two, go scout out that tower; we'll deal with these." - Thorin
[Two dwarves proceed to kill 100 goblins and then kill another 100 orcs before some rival named characters proceed to shut that shit down]

Previous Films:
"Ahhh wolves! Run!"
"Ahhh spiders! Run!"
"Ahhh goblins! Run!"
"Ahhh orcs! Run!"
"Ahhh elves! Run!"

The entire time Dain was yelling, "We need Thorin. Where is he?" I was mentally shouting, "It's 13 fucking dwarves. How are they bailing out AN ARMY and not the other way around?!"

And then we have what felt like shitting on your own storyline. Kind of like how in Spiderman 3 they had Uncle Ben die not because of Spiderman failing to stop that thug, but because the fucking sandman killed him, thus undercutting the entire justification for Peter Parker becoming a superhero, in this movie you have:

1) Gandalf knowing about Bilbo having the ring. WTF?!
2) Legolas being sent to recruit Aragorn.
3) Setting-destroying tunnel-worms of dooooom! How are these not used to win every siege ever?