|
Post by themaster on Apr 23, 2005 15:52:58 GMT
Unfortunately Rusti the DVD cover synopsis doesnt garantee that hope....
"...One man struggles to find the weapon that will turn the tide for mankind..."
Although I will probably enjoy this film simply because of its subject matter and there just isnt enough alien invasion storys on film to satisfy my lust, I think we will find this film to be even more cheesy than ID4, maybe without the Roland Emmerick brand camp humour, which is a good thing.
I wonder what this 'weapon' could be....sea water? harsh language? A handy downed alien fighting machine kept at area 51? If they kep to typical sci-fi channel formula it will be some virus kept at the handy local labs run by the love interest scientist....
|
|
|
Post by EvilNerfherder on Apr 23, 2005 16:26:40 GMT
Actually.. if the SciFi channel did have a hand in this, I'm surprised it doesn't star.. *shudder*..Dean Cain... home.flash.net/~keller/Karen/images/DEAN2B.jpg [/img] FBI Warning. WANTED. For Crimes Against Acting. Do not try to apprehend him yourself.. He may force you to take his autograph. Call the SciFi channel immediately you see him.
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Apr 23, 2005 16:38:07 GMT
[/img] FBI Warning. WANTED. For Crimes Against Acting. Do not try to apprehend him yourself.. He may force you to take his autograph. Call the SciFi channel immediately you see him.[/quote] Thats uprated to shoot on sight, David hasslehoff too while your at it.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder Child on Apr 23, 2005 19:53:21 GMT
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! What a f*cking piece of crap!!!
Screw you guys! [glow=red,2,300]GO PENDRAGON![/glow]
HAHAHAHAHA!!!
Johan
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Apr 23, 2005 20:10:00 GMT
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! What a f*cking piece of crap!!! Screw you guys! [glow=red,2,300]GO PENDRAGON![/glow] HAHAHAHAHA!!! Johan At least i tried to give a reason for my hate.... more than this guy.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder Child on Apr 23, 2005 20:25:38 GMT
"That's just the kind of guy I am!"
The Red Guy from Cow and Chicken
|
|
|
Post by themaster on Apr 23, 2005 20:34:21 GMT
At least i tried to give a reason for my hate.... more than this guy. Maybe "hate" is too strong a word there Rusti, call it your critical opinion based on your personal perceptions of all the material seen/released thus far by Pendragon Pictures. Like you say you have stated your opinions with great clarity and continuity. Apart from the obvious deviation from the plot of the book I would like to hear a reasoned argument as to why this film looks any worse than Pendragon Pictures version, at the moment this Asylum version looks vastly superior in everthing but its closeness to the plot (at this point its unknown how close it is to the plot so this point, for the time being is somewhat mute, especialy when its also unclear how many scenes Tim Hines has added to his version of his own design).
|
|
|
Post by themaster on Apr 23, 2005 20:38:07 GMT
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! What a f*cking piece of crap!!! Screw you guys! [glow=red,2,300]GO PENDRAGON![/glow] HAHAHAHAHA!!! Johan Is this an attempt to start some sort of flame scuffle? Unfortunatly you look a little foolish because there is no other film currently released or not released that looks as badly produced as Pendragons version of war of the worlds. And such language! Shame on you!
|
|
|
Post by Thunder Child on Apr 23, 2005 20:47:50 GMT
I'm so sorry, no really, I'm so sorry, I'm so sorry, I'm so sorry, I'm so sorry, no really, I'm so sorry.... D.F. i think it's time time use you're bin again. Have you finished repainting it? ;D ;D JOHAN
|
|
|
Post by themaster on Apr 23, 2005 21:03:50 GMT
No amount of impudence, arrogance or sarcasm can hide your crudeness or your foolishness. You have my pitty.
|
|
|
Post by Gnorn on Apr 23, 2005 23:04:20 GMT
At least i tried to give a reason for my hate.... more than this guy. What's that reason again? Because you're from Woking? And therefor Mr. Hines ownes you something? -Gnorn
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Apr 23, 2005 23:38:38 GMT
What's that reason again? Because you're from Woking? And therefor Mr. Hines ownes you something? -Gnorn As I recall, the reasons Rusti gave included little things like, oh, Hinesy Boy being a useless director who has never managed to release a complete film in his life and that he couldn't direct his way out of a paper bag; he has consistently misled everyone who has cared to read his ludicrous and mendaciously self-serving press releases; and just generally been so abysmally bad as to make Ed Wood seem like Orson Welles in comparison. Of course, I paraphrase, but you get the picture.
|
|
|
Post by jeffwaynefan on Apr 23, 2005 23:40:40 GMT
Enough said, back on topic
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Apr 24, 2005 0:36:54 GMT
What's that reason again? Because you're from Woking? And therefor Mr. Hines ownes you something? -Gnorn Yes im from Woking and for your info i think its a pissant little town, stuck up with its own overbearing self importance, covered with graffiti and litter, full of chave scum, asian gangs, and pikey trash who regularly beat each other into a hospital ward. Hinds owes me nothing nor do you. I just want a decent high budget version done by a decent director. A gourmet for the eyes. I cant have that so ill have a pizza instead (the asylum version) not the fetidpiece of animal slop which people are eating up like starving ethiopians. I may be starving for a decent WOTW version but at least i wont eat slop.
|
|
Gray
Full Member
Posts: 114
|
Post by Gray on Apr 24, 2005 0:58:21 GMT
Apart from the obvious deviation from the plot of the book I would like to hear a reasoned argument as to why this film looks any worse than Pendragon Pictures version, at the moment this Asylum version looks vastly superior in everthing but its closeness to the plot A reason why the film might be worse? ...Have you seen the photograph of the paper mache Martian? You think it's "vastly superior" to the Martian in the second Pendragon poster? Really?Nope, no bias here.
|
|
|
Post by RustiSwordz on Apr 24, 2005 1:43:10 GMT
A reason why the film might be worse? ...Have you seen the photograph of the paper mache Martian? You think it's "vastly superior" to the Martian in the second Pendragon poster? Really?Nope, no bias here. its a lot better than that boss eyed dribbling retard of a martian in the PP poster. And as for the Turkey Fighting Machine in the pic of the FM's over London. I can make something better using my nephews lego kits.
|
|
|
Post by EvilNerfherder on Apr 24, 2005 3:28:37 GMT
Do we really have to have the Pendragon Good/Bad arguments in every damn section of this board? Why are we still using a film, that for all we know has sunk without a trace (until we hear different), as a benchmark for everything else? There's no excuse for it really. On quickly scanning this thread alone, maybe a third (if that) of the posts in it are actually on topic. An unbelievable amount are about Pendragon and Tim Hines. I think we're all grown up and intelligent enough to discuss each film on it's own merits without having to resort constantly to the tired ''well it's better/ worse than the PP version..''. For the sake of everyone's sanity, please keep the Pro/Anti Pendragon stuff in the PP section and not here.
|
|
Gray
Full Member
Posts: 114
|
Post by Gray on Apr 24, 2005 4:15:15 GMT
Sorry Nerf. I should have anticipated the response. Didn't mean to bring Pdragon on this board. I was actually trying to stay on topic (Pics from the Howell version, I think) by talking about the photo of their Martian. I don't want to impugn the efforts of the people who created it, but when I saw it, I didn't think it was "vastly superior" to anything.
Apparently that Martian photo has impressed some here. That's cool, and I'm glad it works for them, but I think that for those who find it worthy of praise, well, the only way I can make sense of it is that their standards must not be very high for this particlular story element.
I'm not trying to trash the Howell Martian; I just don't understand how anyone would think that it was worth singling out as being a "superior" piece of work.
|
|
|
Post by themaster on Apr 24, 2005 5:10:05 GMT
A reason why the film might be worse? ...Have you seen the photograph of the paper mache Martian? You think it's "vastly superior" to the Martian in the second Pendragon poster? Really?Nope, no bias here. As the subject of Pendragon is a taboo (understandably) I wont get into a handbags at dawn argument with you about the merrits of the Pendragon martian as it speaks for itself. Unlike you I havent made up my mind about this new version at all, you will find my posts quite fair on these threads, I stick up for it when I feel I need to and I critisize it when I want to as is my right, however, you are quite right, there is no bias here. The dead 'thing' by the mine shaft does look shoddy, but then claims of this being equal to the matrix havent been made and we dont know if that 'dildokite' is in fact a martian, remember they bring other creatures with them as food (the humanoid element my have been cut for any number of reasons both good and bad). If the film stayes close to the plot they dont get the chance to find a dead martian until the end but those guys look too clean for that. When I say superior I do mean in every general way, remember you havent seen the martian in any other version yet, (the bit we have seen looks like the first thing it will say is "wheres the nearest toilet" as it looks a little 'strained') all the images for this Asylum film look quite good and there is a lot of blood splashed about indicating it to be quite dark. They already have a DVD cover (yes a bit nasty but at least it exists), they have proven actors with what appears to be a capable FX team for a cheap production, we know that when they say they will release their film it will probably get released and last but not least they reply to their emails. Now I dont want to get into a debate about this, im not anti or pro anything but fair is fair and those who have been very pro Pendragon have used the same tired arguments they use to defend Pendragon now to slate this version, which to be quite honest is hypocricy (said as a cold none offensive observation). So putting aside the rubber dildokite as we cant compare anything until we see a rubber Pendragon martian is indeed this asylum thing is a martian at all, please explain to me (without mentioning Pendragon too much as that would be "off topic") how this new film looks worse (plot deviations aside) and so deserves the contempt of the Pro Hines lobby. Later amigo's.
|
|
|
Post by EvilNerfherder on Apr 24, 2005 5:37:31 GMT
Discussing Pendragon is not taboo, theMaster. Neither is comparing the different versions. The trouble is it never stops there, does it? Each time a comparison with Pendragon is made, it invariably degenerates in to a Tim Hines slagging or backslapping session and it ends up dominating the topic, tempers get frayed and it all turns into a mess. It happens so often you couldn't get a bookie to take bets on it. I know PP is a controversial and valid topic and I can see the need for it to be discussed.. but there really is no need to drag it out on every thread right across the board. Also, there seems to be an assumption growing that the Pro-Hines lobby are automatically against this film and the AHB are, conversely, for it. From what I've seen so far that's not necessarily true. I hope this isn't going to turn into a 'my film is better than your film' contest.
|
|