Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://www.cc2k.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1834

...someone needs their heads chopped off!

Good lord...

I´m shivering.... pacifism? modern weapons?

what else, aliens too? Ups! that´s the second movie my bad

M.

I though that they used swords because that was the only way, you know up close personal lopping off of heads. It was a code of honnor? Also I could almost (just barely, with a big grain of salt) swallow the pacifism. Statisticly eventually you will find an imortal who is also a weenie, but who they did it to is pretty bad though.

This has to be the worst remake ever.

Highlander: There Can Be Only One... EVER.

I mean, seriously, how much rotten ass were the sequels? I don't think you can quantify it, it's just that much rotten ass. It's like a bad D&D magical item, Bucket of Endless Rotten Ass; it just never stops coming.

Hey, if they want to pitch money down the rathole of a movie no-one in their right mind will pay to see, it'll stimulate SOMEONE'S economy... that's really the only upside I see.

GrrBear wrote:I though that they used swords because that was the only way, you know up close personal lopping off of heads. It was a code of honnor? Also I could almost (just barely, with a big grain of salt) swallow the pacifism. Statisticly eventually you will find an imortal who is also a weenie, but who they did it to is pretty bad though.

Darius and one other in the show were weenies. They both got their heads cut off.

I read only the headline and wanted to do some head-lopping of my own. This is a crime against Humanity!

WC at least you didn't read the whole thing, that movie sounds like it is going to suck, and I mean suck.

...wait till you hear about the 40k movie...

Saw that all ready, boring as feth...

Calgar; a tail of war and forbidden love in the Forty First millennium.

Marneus Augustus Calgar, was to become the most fearsome warrior of his time. Yet in his youth he was torn between his duty to the Ultramarines, and his forbidden love the Farseer Caerys. At the battle of Sullen VI his loyalties would be put to the test.

Noooooooooooooo!!!! Just clean up the original print and remove those wires at the end, that's all they need to do. I remember going to the pictures to see it 4 times, it was a brilliant story. Guns!?! What the feth is that all about? Swords all the way, they add style and mean you have to face your enemy face to face.

40k movie? Over heard a chat in my local GW store yesterday. A customer was talking about that and the red shirt pointed out an interesting thing that I'd not thought of. Any company that makes a movie relies on merchandise to boast revenue, GW won't allow that. As they rightly point out, they have all the movie merchandise you could ever need. So this means there is less incentive for a film studio to make a movie.

I thought there was ONLY one highlander movie already?

There were delusions of "sequels" made, but I could find no-one who saw them.

Meh. Highlander wasn't a good move, and this sounds no worse. Stop crying, fanbois.

lord_sutekh wrote:Highlander: There Can Be Only One...

You haven't watched it recently have you? There shouldn't have been any!

Hollywood does it because *they* can. Also, they *believe* they have a finger on the pulse of the mainstream and *know* what the people *like*

They do it because
1. They want to make money
2. They have no concept of a new idea. The people setting this up are sheister BS artists, who wear balck and can't keep a straight thgouht for more than 30 seconds. We're not dealing with the deep end of the gene pool.

They may be the only people who type as badly as I do.

The reaction in this thread is the same one that I and probably everyone here felt after hearing the news of a Star Trek movie featuring a young Kirk and Spock; and it turned out to be one hell of a movie. Sure great movies are rare but its definitely within the realm of reality.

The new GI JOE looks like crap though.

dogma wrote:Meh. Highlander wasn't a good move, and this sounds no worse. Stop crying, fanbois.

This man speaks the truth. I love the movie but I know it really isn't a very good one, it just had a unique idea at the time. Nostalgia can wreak havoc with ones perspective.

Cane wrote:The reaction in this thread is the same one that I and probably everyone here felt after hearing the news of a Star Trek movie featuring a young Kirk and Spock; and it turned out to be one hell of a movie. Sure great movies are rare but its definitely within the realm of reality.

The new GI JOE looks like crap though.

I thought it was a good idea and looked forward to it. G.I. Joe looks bad on many different levels.

I like the original highlander, the rest is dumb. The movie made me a fan of Clancy Brown, he was great in Carnivalle. but I could care less what Christopher Lambert does.

The original movie is kinda dated to me now though. I wouldn't mind a remake if it's done well, hopefully it won't be stupid, but knowing hollywood......

Frazzled wrote:They do it because
1. They want to make money
2. They have no concept of a new idea. The people setting this up are sheister BS artists, who wear balck and can't keep a straight thgouht for more than 30 seconds. We're not dealing with the deep end of the gene pool.

They may be the only people who type as badly as I do.

Thing is, rehashes of old ideas consistently make bank, new ideas are much riskier. Sure, people complain and know the rehash will suck, but they go and see it. If people want to stop the rehashes, stop going to see them, and start supporting new properties.

Meanwhile, the new highlander will almost certainly suck. If only because everything after the first movie sucked, just as sequels based on unexpectedly successful b-movies always do.

That review was horrible though. Much gnashing and wailing of teeth over irrelevant minutiae, and not a second's attention paid to stuff that really matters like pacing.

Agreed. Twice in the same day.

By the pricking of my thumbs, something evil this way comes...

.....i can't believe they would do something so stupid. Please Flop!

The old movies have something the new movie will most certainly lack: A good soundtrack by Queen.

BrookM wrote:The old movies have something the new movie will most certainly lack: A good soundtrack by Queen.

Don't worry i have it from reliable sources that the new soundtrack will be by:

*Greenday
*the Jonas Brothers
*Miley Cyrus

They make lots of money so they have to be good to right?

Frazzled wrote:

BrookM wrote:The old movies have something the new movie will most certainly lack: A good soundtrack by Queen.

Don't worry i have it from reliable sources that the new soundtrack will be by:

*Greenday
*the Jonas Brothers
*Miley Cyrus

They make lots of money so they have to be good to right?

YES. OH FETH YES. We have a box office bomb in the making.

Frazzled wrote:Don't worry i have it from reliable sources that the new soundtrack will be by:
*Greenday
*the Jonas Brothers
*Miley Cyrus
They make lots of money so they have to be good to right?

Unless they have Britney Spears sing the title song, it just won't cut it.

Hollywood loves to rehash. Personally, I like the original Highlander. It's not great art, but it's a very entertaining film. To me, it's a lot like the Thomas Jane Punisher, it's not high art, but it's still a good film to sit down and watch. The director's cut of Highlander adds some nice touches to the story. The remake sounds lousy. But, is this even in pre-production? A lot changes between script and final cut.

This sounds like a regular problem with Hollywood - and that is Hollywood. Why did Alien 3 end up like it did? Hollywood, because the suits thought they couldn't make an Alien movie without Weaver, so she got all her demands (and she's an anti-gun person, so they had to take out all the firepower). They wanted a 'new' director, so they hired Fincher (who's ok, but this was his first film, iirc), and my guess is that was mostly so he'd be cheap.

I'd rather see them do a Highlander pre-quel than a remake. Ramierez as a youth, just find a wife-beating young Scotsmen (not that all Scots beat their wives, but Sean Connery has implied that he does).

Why was the Blair Witch project hailed by critics? Because it was different. Personally, I thought the ending was horrible and sank the whole film (I thought it should have ended less definitely - you don't know exactly what happened to them, it just 'ends').

Damnit, I want it all, and I want it now.

Ra: The sensation you are feeling is the Quickening.
Mc: What does it quicken?
Ra: You
*Cue Mc jumping over missiles.

Frazzled wrote:They do it because
1. They want to make money
2. They have no concept of a new idea. The people setting this up are sheister BS artists, who wear balck and can't keep a straight thgouht for more than 30 seconds. We're not dealing with the deep end of the gene pool.

They may be the only people who type as badly as I do.

No-one who is anyone in Hollywood types. They have people who do that for them.