Re: Random Thoughts

With the Mummy falling short at the box office, what are the odds that Universal's "Dark Universe" never gets off the ground?

Re: Random Thoughts

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-f … ls-1001345

I learned about this a while ago, but got distracted by life stuff.

Can't wait to see what they do with this! I'm going to need a pineapple (pizza? Or maybe upside down cake), cinnamon pie, and Quatro Queso Dos Fritos!

Re: Random Thoughts

I forgot to reply about the Dark Universe.

DC/Warner has also been working on a Dark Universe project for a long time and I think there is a lawsuit over the name. If Universal's project isn't making them a lot of money, it may not make sense to fight for it.

Re: Random Thoughts

Informant wrote:

I forgot to reply about the Dark Universe.

DC/Warner has also been working on a Dark Universe project for a long time and I think there is a lawsuit over the name. If Universal's project isn't making them a lot of money, it may not make sense to fight for it.

The Weekly Planet was talking about this recently, and they were wondering if the "Dark Universe" name was just DC's insurance in case Justice League isn't successful.  Because the proper name is "Justice League: Dark" - and the success of Justice League will probably affect the marketing for the "dark" movie.  If Justice League is successful, DC will want to connect to it.  If it's not successful (or at least not critically successful), then they might want to make it feel separate with a different-sounding name.

I'm still assuming Justice League will be great, and it'll be called "Justice League: Dark"

105 (edited by Grizzlor 2017-06-16 12:33:33)

Re: Random Thoughts

Hard to say.  I personally thought the trailer for The Mummy was top notch, and I still enjoyed the movie.  However, I understand the public sentiment.  It's not a "Mummy" movie, it's a Tom Cruise movie.  Now I'm a fan of his action work, but I can see how many have probably grown tired of him.  You're not watching The Mummy, you're watching Cruise with The Mummy as background.  IDK, maybe they just should have remade the Monster Squad!


Also, I think it's important to note that Alex Kurtzman probably wasn't the best choice here, despite having a VERY involved Cruise on set.  Goes back to my long-standing criticism of just about everything he and Roberto Orci touch.  Usually vapid trash that makes tons of money, or vapid, boring trash that doesn't.

http://screenrant.com/tom-cruise-contro … -kurtzman/

Re: Random Thoughts

Hmmm, considering what a mess the Dark Universe seems to be, I wonder if they'll just scrap it.  Cruise's star power could probably keep it afloat, but it seems horribly planned.  They only have one filmed planned, a couple stars attached, and a ton of TBAs.  Shouldn't be too hard to hit the eject button if they want to.

Re: Random Thoughts

Are there any Blade Runner fans here?

The new video looks pretty cool.  I don't love the cast (Jake Gyllenhaal should have starred) but the new footage has me more excited for the film than I was after the trailer first came out.

http://ew.com/movies/2017/06/21/blade-r … mentweekly

Re: Random Thoughts

The movie does look pretty cool. I'm curious to see where the plot goes.

As for casting... I'm not a huge fan of either Gyllenhaal. I think they're both approaching Matt Damon/Leo DiCaprio levels of over-rated. So I prefer Ryan Gosling by far. smile

Re: Random Thoughts

Informant wrote:

The movie does look pretty cool. I'm curious to see where the plot goes.

As for casting... I'm not a huge fan of either Gyllenhaal. I think they're both approaching Matt Damon/Leo DiCaprio levels of over-rated. So I prefer Ryan Gosling by far. smile

I'm surprised you prefer Gosling. To me, he seems like a choice of the studio to maximize the revenue potential on this flick, but he seems all wrong for the franchise.  Blade Runner takes place in a very gloomy environment. You need someone with some gruff and who can do downtrodden far better. I just don't think Gosling is right for that at all. Gynllenhaal would be excellent, imo, take a look at him in Prisoners.  Which is directed by the guy doing 2049. 

It's too bad though Ridley couldn't come back - he had to do the next Alien which of course bombed.

Re: Random Thoughts

BR 2049 looks very good, and this comes from someone who isn't a fan of the original.

Re: Random Thoughts

I guess we don't really have to be for either Gyllenhaal or Gosling. There are tons of actors out there who could have carried the role in another universe. I just mean to say that I like Gosling better. He has a better screen presence and just don't irritate me as much as Gyllenhaal has come to (I did like Donnie Darko and October Sky).


In the end, I just wish that Harrison Ford wasn't so closed off to the idea of returning to one of the roles that made him famous.
(/sarcasm)

Re: Random Thoughts

I have a feeling that Ford won't be in the movie all that much.  Might just be a minor part towards the end.  All the scenes he's in look like the same set piece, right?

113 (edited by RussianCabbie_Lotteryfan 2017-06-23 10:16:49)

Re: Random Thoughts

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

I have a feeling that Ford won't be in the movie all that much.  Might just be a minor part towards the end.  All the scenes he's in look like the same set piece, right?

that's a good point, i didn't think about that. i can't believe they have him wearing a grey t-shirt too.

Re: Random Thoughts

Well, I think Harrison Ford is happy to reappear in these "soft reboots" / continuations, but I think he doesn't want to do much of the heavy lifting.  It was harder with Star Wars, but I think in this he could be a minor person who provides information from the past and connects to what happened before. 

That's just my guess.  The dude is in his mid-70s so it's hard to expect too much from him these days.

Re: Random Thoughts

Isn't he signed to play Indy again?

Re: Random Thoughts

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

That's just my guess.  The dude is in his mid-70s so it's hard to expect too much from him these days.


other than crashing planes, yea.

Re: Random Thoughts

#TooSoon

Re: Random Thoughts

Informant wrote:

Isn't he signed to play Indy again?

Yes, I believe. So can we assume they kill his character off? Steven Spielberg has a lot prove after they pasted in Shia LaBeouf swinging through trees.

slidecage.com
Twitter @slidersfanblog
Instagram slidersfanblog

Re: Random Thoughts

Nice piece on the original Blade Runner, with a roundtable interview from some of the experts

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/h … =hootsuite

Re: Random Thoughts

I've been reading all of the rumors about the Samsung Galaxy Note 8, and also the IPhone 8. They've been running a race for fingerprint scanning built into the display, and I was curious to see who would win. Short answer, probably neither. The Note will have it built into the back of the phone.

But the more interesting updates have been for the iPhone.
They don't seem to have any fingerprint scanner at this point, since they failed to put it into the screen. They could put it on back, but they haven't ordered the parts yet and time is running out.

No fingerprint scanner means that they will be relying on facial recognition. This poses some problems, including the fact that it isn't yet reliable enough to be used for highly secure features, such as Apple Pay. So, no Apple Pay at launch?

Still no headphone jack.

Wireless charging is a big new addition, but new rumors suggest that it may not actually work at launch.

The rumor is that the screen will cover the entire front of the phone, but there will be a notch on the top of the screen, for the camera, sensors, etc. So while it will technically have a lot of screen space, I don't think that space will all be usable for games, videos, pictures, etc. It will mostly be status bar stuff.

Rumors are also saying that parts may be in short supply, so the number of available phones may be lower than normal, resulting in a delay in availability.

Rumors also suggest that Apple may be asking as much as $1200 for the basic iPhone 8, and possibly up to $1500 for the better one, because they're going for a "pro" crowd.


I'm not an Apple person, so I'm curious how this sounds to their customers. I'm sure that it will have better screen resolution and processing, and all of that. But can Apple charge that much money for a phone that seems to be cutting some features that people either rely on or were expecting to be added?

All of this is based on rumors and anonymous sources, so while it would pass CNN standards, it is really just hypothetical right now, for the sake of discussion. I'm just curious to know how these rumors look to anyone who might actually consider an iPhone.

Re: Random Thoughts

I've been an Apple person most of my life (even before it was "cool" to , before Apple stores and when if you were lucky , a large computer store *might* have a small apple section tucked away in the corner). As far as phones, I have the 6, which I'm  keeping until it dies, since my unlimited data will end when I have to get a new phone. These rumors don't sound so great to me.

I wouldn't expect a headphone jack to come back.

Screen to cover the whole surface? Doesn't sound appealing to me.

Fingerprint scanner doesn't matter much to me, and I don't use Apple Pay anyway.

Price sounds like way too much.... I doubt that's right.

So basically sounds like a lot of money for stuff I don't care about (and the lack of something I do care about, a headphone jack).

I'll definitely be keeping the 6 as long as I can.

Re: Random Thoughts

If I'm paying $1200 for a phone, it's going to be this one:

https://thumbs.worthpoint.com/zoom/images1/360/0713/09/sliders-original-timer-replica-full_360_3dbfc18ff53d6e81403e4ed8388729d3.jpg

Re: Random Thoughts

TemporalFlux wrote:

If I'm paying $1200 for a phone, it's going to be this one:

https://thumbs.worthpoint.com/zoom/images1/360/0713/09/sliders-original-timer-replica-full_360_3dbfc18ff53d6e81403e4ed8388729d3.jpg

Nice! Is that an original prop?

Re: Random Thoughts

btw, it is sad to see dimensionofcontinuity.com is no longer with us..

Re: Random Thoughts

RussianCabbie_Lotteryfan wrote:

btw, it is sad to see dimensionofcontinuity.com is no longer with us..

It is sad indeed

Re: Random Thoughts

sad

Re: Random Thoughts

It's still online; it just looks like someone is converting it to a content management system. Be patient, young ones...

Earth Prime | The Definitive Source for Sliders™

Re: Random Thoughts

Transmodiar wrote:

It's still online; it just looks like someone is converting it to a content management system. Be patient, young ones...

good to know!

Re: Random Thoughts

Why are people mad that Ed Sheeran guest starred on Game of Thrones?

Re: Random Thoughts

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

Why are people mad that Ed Sheeran guest starred on Game of Thrones?

maybe because it breaks the fourth wall sort of thing?  It's mixing universes!

Re: Random Thoughts

I guess.  I had no idea what he looked like, and I wasn't drawn out of the scene because of bad acting.

Re: Random Thoughts

I don't really know (or care much since GoT isn't exactly tv at its best) but I imagine that it could feel like something that serves friendships and egos more than story. If it doesn't serve the story, it shouldn't be there

As it was... Like I said, I don't care. I don't know if the scene really added anything to the episode, and within the scene, the song seemed a bit awkward. However, I don't think that it was so distracting that it requires a lot of outrage.

Re: Random Thoughts

Informant wrote:

As it was... Like I said, I don't care. I don't know if the scene really added anything to the episode, and within the scene, the song seemed a bit awkward. However, I don't think that it was so distracting that it requires a lot of outrage.

But they've had a handful of scenes exactly like that in several episodes.  Main characters are always running into people on the road to wherever and seeing what "common people" are talking about.  I think the purpose of the scene was to sorta humanize Arya, who had just slaughtered a room full of people.  I think it's going to pay dividends down the road.

The song was weird, but I didn't think twice about it.  Bands of people sang for entertainment back then.  Even the "it's new" line, while weird, I thought was kinda cool at the time because people would have to create new songs.  Even if Ed Sheeran was playing Edd Shee-ran, a songwriter....well, songwriters had to exist back then.  Maybe this was a guy who wanted to get into songs but was forced to do something else.

People just like to get outraged.

Re: Random Thoughts

In other outrage news, I saw nothing on my twitter/facebook timeline indicating that *anyone* was upset about the Dr. Who casting.  I saw a *ton* of stuff on my twitter/facebook making fun of people who were outraged about the Dr. Who casting.

Are we just at a place socially where we assume that people are going to freak out about gender/race-swapping, and we're pre-emptively shaming them whether they actually complain or not?

Re: Random Thoughts

Pretty much. The actress made a comment about people being afraid of her gender, and it just strikes me as an excuse. Now anyone who doesn't like her is sexist. But what about the people who didn't like Capaldi?

This is why I don't like gender/race swapping characters. The people doing it are obviously doing it to make a statement about being progressive or whatever, and they point fingers at anyone who doesn't fall in line. If she is a great Doctor, people will forget that they ever had doubts. If she's not, it's on the people making the show, not on the fans. The actress should have just said "I know this is a big, weird move. I understand people having doubts. If I do my job right, I will prove them wrong."

Re: Random Thoughts

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

The song was weird, but I didn't think twice about it.  Bands of people sang for entertainment back then.

"Back then" when there were dragons and ice men who animate dead bodies?  lol

Westeros may look like medieval Earth, but it's not.  There are many differences, one of which is apparently the style of music minstrels play.

Re: Random Thoughts

pilight wrote:

"Back then" when there were dragons and ice men who animate dead bodies?  lol

Westeros may look like medieval Earth, but it's not.  There are many differences, one of which is apparently the style of music minstrels play.

Ha, well, "back then" can also mean "in times when there wasn't anything else to do"

Re: Random Thoughts

I only started following DOCTOR WHO in 2000 (with novels and audioplays) and I was against gender-swapping the Doctor from 2000 to 2014. In the last three years, however, the show has introduced the concept that Time Lords could change gender and successfully sold me on it.

First, DW introduced a mysterious new character named Missy, a manipulative woman who was collecting the consciousnesses of various deceased characters. Missy is revealed to be the Doctor's old enemy, the Master, renamed Missy after the last regeneration resulted in a female body. And the show demonstrated that Missy was still the Master, the core character was the same, just expressed differently in a new form, which is what regeneration's all about anyway.

Originally, I felt that the Doctor, regardless of being an alien, was conceived as a Victorian era scientist and all the Doctors, when written well, have been written as this original character albeit in a different body. As Steven Moffat says, there's only one Doctor but with multiple faces and you feel different when you've changed your clothes or even just your shoes, so imagine how you feel in a whole new body. But that body, and that personality, was that of a man; a man who liked to show off for young girls and be the older brother and father while occasionally being flirty. The Doctor's relationships with women always made me think of him as someone who would always self-identify as a man.

But then came the Master becoming Missy and the Master as a woman was simply the Master with a different body. There was also the first Capaldi episode where the Doctor's old friend, Vastra, remarked that the Doctor, as Matt Smith, would flirt with women, but it was a facade affected to be understood and accepted as something humans could comprehend, and the idea that flirting with women is essential to the Doctor is set aside when Capaldi tells Clara that he is not her boyfriend.

And then, "Hell Bent" had the recurring Time Lord, the General, regenerate into a woman at which point she remarked that her last incarnation was the only time she'd ever been a man and she was relieved to be free of the male ego. At this point, it became clear to me that the Doctor didn't necessarily have to be a man, that Time Lord characteristics even in male-female relationships could shift without being totally revised in a regeneration; the flirting with women was only a technique seen with Doctors 9 - 11 that Capaldi's Doctor had cast off.

So, at this point, DOCTOR WHO has set up the concept of Time Lord males becoming women, shown how Time Lord characterizations can adjust to female bodies, indicated that it's in no way unusual among them, and also had Capaldi declare that he can't actually remember if the First Doctor was a woman or not and that Gallifreyan civilization is beyond concern for gender differentiation. DOCTOR WHO has done all the work to earn this change for the Doctor and done it carefully, thoughtfully and had the process take place over the course of three seasons and anyone complaining that the show is just doing this randomly out of desperation for ratings has not been watching the show very closely.

Re: Random Thoughts

Well of any gender/race-swapping, Dr. Who makes the most sense.  It's baked into the idea, and it's a good storytelling idea (particularly since this is The Doctor's first time as a woman).

I just haven't witnessed *anyone* complaining.  But I've seen a ton of people making fun of people who are complaining.  It's just weird to see the satire without the original source.

Re: Random Thoughts

I think I see more people concerned over the motive for this move than the move itself.

If the driving force behind this decision is that the writers have story ideas that they want to explore, which are best served with a female Doctor, then I don't think most people would mind. However, if this is more along the lines of recent trends which want to tell us that gender is meaningless and men and women are all the same, and we must accept the female Doctor because #equality or whatever... that is just not a good way to approach any character.

Yeah, we've been told over the past few years that this is possible for Time Lords. However, a lot of people have a lot of issues with what's been done with the series, and it would be a mistake to assume that having them oppose this move would automatically make them sexist or whatever. The Doctor has always been a man, and the idea of gender swapping is relatively new in the grand scheme of things. Those who are purists might reject the concept, because it hadn't been established in the show's first half-century of existence.

I do disagree with the idea that the Doctor's flirting was all just a show. The Doctor had a thing for Rose, and a version of the Doctor eventually ended up going off to be with her. We also have the issue of River Song, whom the Doctor clearly loves in a romantic (though not necessarily sexual) way. Of course, having feelings for women (and no men that I can remember) isn't necessarily just a man thing, but it's always gone hand in hand with his being a male. So, will the new Doctor suddenly start developing similar feelings for men? Will she still be drawn to women?

The whole thing is a political minefield, but if they just keep their heads down and tell good stories rather than preach about gender fluidity or whatever, it probably won't matter much.

Re: Random Thoughts

The Doctor changes personality in each regeneration.  That was established back when Patrick Troughton took over as the Second Doctor.  Changing sexual preference could easily be incorporated as part of that.

Re: Random Thoughts

I think that ultimately the bigger concern is Chibnall as show runner.

With Moffat, we kind of had an idea of where he would go because of his stories during the Davies era.  Moffat was overall more focused on the big ideas with characters woven into that. 

With Chibnall, I think it's going back more to the overall flavor of the Davies era, and Chibnall will focus on characters first with big ideas secondary or even not present at all (such as his Torchwood episode which was simply the team vs human serial killers - a story that could have been on any generic drama).  And I think it's worth noting too that creators tend to use things they identify with; and given his involvement in Torchwood (I believe Chibnall was de facto show runner of season two), I feel confident we'll see Torchwood popping up again with possibly Captain Jack, Gwen and even Martha (who was part of season two).

In any case, I've been kind of spoiled on the big ideas of Moffat; and I don't really want to go backwards to the Davies years.  Personally, I believe it was the strong leads that carried Davies stories on their shoulders (Eccleston and especially Tennant).  If you remove Tennant's performance, many of those Davies era stories are pretty thin when you look at them through that lens.

So the question becomes, is Whittaker as an actor strong enough to carry the show on her back?  That could be what it comes down to; and it's a tall order.  We'll see; but to be honest, I'm thinking Ill use this as my jumping off point on the show.  I'm just not excited or interested by the casting choice, and it feels to me like an appeasement gimmick more than anything.  They think they're going to up their audience, and that's great.  I wish them well.

Re: Random Thoughts

Does anyone here watch "The Strain"?  It's in its final season.  It's pretty good....but Zach is the worst character in the history of television.  I literally hate the show every time he's on.

Re: Random Thoughts

RussianCabbie_Lotteryfan wrote:

btw, it is sad to see dimensionofcontinuity.com is no longer with us..

Unfortunately, this is still the case..

Re: Random Thoughts

RussianCabbie_Lotteryfan wrote:
RussianCabbie_Lotteryfan wrote:

btw, it is sad to see dimensionofcontinuity.com is no longer with us..

Unfortunately, this is still the case..

Now it's completely offline.  Hope the great TF (http://sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?id=121) brings it back.