|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 12, 2005 20:25:43 GMT
Whenthey talk humour I dont think they mean slapstick or one liners but rather black humour, I think your generating negativity in your head to desperatly explain why this movie will be a cheesy sequal to ID4, maybe you secretly want it to be so maybe not but whatever, its up to you.
Spileberg put off production due to ID4 because he didnt want to be associated with it, but I suppose it was inevitable that some like your selves would draw a comparison because its got aliens in it.
Oh well, I know im going to enjoy it!
|
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 12, 2005 20:30:43 GMT
I think your generating negativity in your head to desperatly explain why this movie will be a cheesy sequal to ID4, maybe you secretly want it to be so maybe not but whatever, its up to you. whats the old saying? something about having a mote in your eye? he without sin? something like that? (cough pendragon forums cough)  |
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 12, 2005 20:36:19 GMT
Holy cammel poo malf whats your problem, all your stuff about Spielberg is conjecture, it all looks ace so far but thats not enough for good old malfuntion is it?
Me on the other hand, every thing I said about PP was true, up to now its all been sh*te and you know it, how did I make that up in my head? Did I imagine that dire trailer malf? Did I generate the negativity of the dire acting and crapy website malf? NO its all the truth, but your seeing negativity thats not even there! the trailers look dark and the effects look spot on, the acting will be good because no Spielberg film has bad acting.
Im not a hypocrite malf dont imply that I am, if Spilebergs film looked crap I would bloody well say so!
|
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 12, 2005 20:44:00 GMT
Holy cammel poo malf whats your problem, all your stuff about Spielberg is conjecture, it all looks ace so far but thats not enough for good old malfuntion is it? Me on the other hand, every thing I said about PP was true, up to now its all been sh*te and you know it, how did I make that up in my head? Did I imagine that dire trailer malf? Did I generate the negativity of the dire acting and crapy website malf? NO its all the truth, but your seeing negativity thats not even there! the trailers look dark and the effects look spot on, the acting will be good because no Spielberg film has bad acting. Im not a hypocrite malf dont imply that I am, if Spilebergs film looked crap I would bloody well say so! it all comes back to our own points of view, what we consider valuable when we imagine seeing WOTW put to the screen. apparently, the difference between you and myself is that I am willing to put up with low budget effects, you are willing to put up with blatant disregard for the original book. everything PP has put out has NOT been nutse. thats where we differ. you think its the gods honest truth because its your opinion. when i tell you that i think that the PP effects are acceptable to me, knowing that the movie will be accurate, and that its an affordable trade... well you can believe me, i'm not blowing smoke up your arse because i'm a purist. just like yourself... i did not imagine the dire changes SS has made to the original story, just as you didn't imagine that dire trailer. not so hard a concept to grasp is it, differences of opinion? i'm not calling you a hypocrite. but you have your habit of trashing PP, i have my habit of trashing SS. thats the point i was trying to make, i hope its more clear to you now. |
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 12, 2005 20:52:27 GMT
Oh its very clear indeed, and when Spielberg releases three ultra dire trailers I will agree with you.
"Purist" thats cool, But you know after this films been released and you flick through the pages of the book guess what its will still be the same as it is now! thats whats cool about it, the storys not being changed its just a different version of the story is being made and made well, its better than the story being made badly in an authentic way. How come you dont gripe about george Pals version? That different, it has the A bomb and the martians are crap and they have shields and god saves us at the end but you dont moan about that? The difference is that it was well made just as Spielbergs will be.
|
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 12, 2005 21:04:22 GMT
i can think of a lot of trailers that blew me away, and the movies wound up being crap, so can you come up with a different support for your argument? that one is pretty tired and has been proven to be false in a lot of instances.
i don't gripe about the george pal version because that version means very little to me. it is merely an amusement, not even worth really paying attention to. plus it was made decades ago, and i saw it when i was 8 years old, i've already come to terms with that one. besides, i had the book back then, and the JW album. NOW we have 3 chances to see the book made into a movie. you can bet your arse i'm going to gripe about what i don't like concerning all 3 and what i think is important.
|
|
|
|
Post by Necronmaniac on Feb 12, 2005 21:06:31 GMT
Thats is a fair point malf, however, my only gripe is that you dont really try and be objective about things. You could at least try and look at things from both points of view, we aint seen anywhere near enough footage for you to be able to know they have shown total disregard for the book, and everything i have read so far in interviews suggests they are following the book as closely as they can.
I cant even remember you commenting on some of the good points of this film which they have kept from the book, the tri pods, the red weed, the cellar scene which is "straight from HG wells" this is not going to be another 1953 style film (which really was war of the worlds in name only) but nor will it be a 100% accurate re telling of the book, its just going to be an adaption and i dont think there is anything wrong with that.
Lets b honest, lord of the rings was not a 100% faithful version it was an adaption and that was bloody awesome, so i dont see why this one cant be also.
|
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 12, 2005 21:10:40 GMT
Malf, you seem to be baseing your likes and dislikes about Spielbergs film based on one interview and ton of assumptions with out actualy seeing any proof, where as your letting Hines get away with creating a monster with all of his stuff being absolute rubbish, I have to question your logic there.
|
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 12, 2005 21:11:21 GMT
i have commented about the good points of SS version. i said i'm gonna go see the movie, i'm still excited about it, but mainly for the special effects. thats the only good thing that this movie is going to have for me. it could be called anything else besides WOTW and my attitude towards it would probably be completely different. the fact that they're taking the original story, which is sacred to me, and wantonly making changes here and there, with little respect for the original story and spirit of the book, is what has my undies bunched. SS keeps saying that he wants to make the message applicable to the present day. well i could give 2 shats if the message applies to the modern day, i want to hear and see the original god dam message, and thats why i'm pissed about this. |
|
|
|
Post by Necronmaniac on Feb 12, 2005 21:17:13 GMT
well, this isnt really going anywhere, malf has decided he hates this film and nothing we say or nothing spielberg does will change that, fair does but i do think u need to b a little less stubborn and try and realise that there is more than one way to tell a story.
|
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 12, 2005 21:24:44 GMT
Malf, you seem to be baseing your likes and dislikes about Spielbergs film based on one interview and ton of assumptions with out actualy seeing any proof, where as your letting Hines get away with creating a monster with all of his stuff being absolute rubbish, I have to question your logic there. all of his stuff, is to you, the special effects in the trailer. thats about 2 minuts of footage, compared to... what, a 2 hour movie? i also question your logic, as you are judging a movie based on a few seconds of FX shots. IMO, keeping the story intact is just as important as the FX. you apparently are willing to put up with dire changes to core elements of the book, and IMO you're just as guilty for letting SS 'get away' with this as I am for being willing to enjoy an accurate depiction with less than perfect effects. |
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 12, 2005 21:28:51 GMT
For the last time its not just the effects, I would rather see a well made pollished movie worthy of my cash than a shoddy travesty of a school play just because its word for word, but for you its the other way around thats called "misplaced loyalty"
|
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 12, 2005 21:37:27 GMT
For the last time its not just the effects, I would rather see a well made pollished movie worthy of my cash than a shoddy travesty of a school play just because its word for word, but for you its the other way around thats called "misplaced loyalty" ok now its my turn to get frustrated. there is no 'loyalty' here. i am not a wells worshipper. i am not an SS worshipper. i love the original story of WOTW. i want to see it accurately depicted. whats so hard to understand about that? almost every gripe you have made regarding the PP production has been about the effects. thats all you've seen are the effects. what else are you judging the movie on? you haven't seen ANY of it except for those snippets. it seems obvious to me that the FX are all thats important to you, but you say different... ok, but its not the impression you've given. i also would rather see a well made movie. i'm sure the SS movie will be well made. it will be entertaining. but i am VERY dissapponited every time i hear about a new change. it takes it farther and farther away from the book. isn't the point of making a movie out of a book so that it somewhat resembles the book? it may seem so to you motile, but i am not a wells fanboy and an SS hater. i love LOTS of SS movies. Close Ecounters is probably my favorite movie of all time. Jurassic park was my introduction to real CG. oh yeah, and I thought Food of the Gods was boring. |
|
|
|
Post by themotile on Feb 12, 2005 22:57:50 GMT
They say first impressions count, my first impression of the PP film where "Oh dear, thats realy bad acting..." the second thing we get was the "cast messages" I instantly took a dislike to the cast, a bunch of cheese merchants. The third and final straw was the trailer and we all know how that went, coupled with the web site and the first promisses from Hines that we were going to get top notch FX we werent going to believe add to that the whole missmanagement of the camaign and that is what I base my impression of that movie on, not just the FX.
Now I look at SS's version and its the opposite, I see destruction, great broody atmosphere, dread, missery, we know we are getting the cellar scene, we know we see the martians feed, we have tripods, red weed the lot! What is there to be unhappy about? I know the martian thing is a bitter taste to handle I do actualy feel the same way but it wont ruin the film for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cylinder on Feb 12, 2005 23:40:28 GMT
Peter Jackson made major changes to the Tolkien books but no one doubts that his films are worthy of the title Lord of the Rings. Apart from a few prissy anal fanboys who can't grasp the notion of ADAPTATION.
|
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 12, 2005 23:42:14 GMT
at least lord of the rings was set in middle earth, at the end of the third age, dark lords were dark lords, and orcs were orcs
|
|
|
|
Post by Cylinder on Feb 12, 2005 23:45:29 GMT
what's a hundred years between friends?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gnorn on Feb 12, 2005 23:52:22 GMT
Peter Jackson made major changes to the Tolkien books but no one doubts that his films are worthy of the title Lord of the Rings. Apart from a few prissy anal fanboys who can't grasp the notion of ADAPTATION. LMAO!!! What would people say if Peter Jackson 'addapted' LOTR and transferred it into a present day situation? Frodo, an all-American boy, wearing a Yankees cap, and facing the evil hordes of the Axis of Evil. -Gnorn |
|
|
|
Post by Cylinder on Feb 12, 2005 23:55:28 GMT
LMAO!!! What would people say if Peter Jackson 'addapted' LOTR and transferred it into a present day situation? Frodo, an all-American boy, wearing a Yankees cap, and facing the evil hordes of the Axis of Evil. -Gnorn MIDDLE EARTH - not real. EARTH - real. 19th Century Earth - real. 21st Century Earth - real. |
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 12, 2005 23:59:26 GMT
MIDDLE EARTH - not real. EARTH - real. 19th Century Earth - real. 21st Century Earth - real. ooo... k. and that is supposed to make a difference... how? lotr - fiction wotw - fiction they're both works of fiction. it doesn't matter where they're set in relation to eachother. |
|
