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.

Jimi Nemesis wrote:
In the trailers, is that an enormous wave dostruying the himalayas? Is there enough water on the freaking planet to do that?

I don't think so. I recall reading about some sort of near-indestructible vault of grain seeds (like a gene bank for the world's food supply) that is being built in some remote Scandinavian region. The article specifically mentioned that it was sited so that even if all the ice in the world melted the entrance would still be above sea level, and it was something like <1000m elevation. The Himalayas has >100 mountains of >7,200m according to Wiki. You'd probably need 10 Anarticas melting to drown them.

I might watch 2012 in a few months when good quality versions find their way onto The Tubez.

Re: Avatar. So the main objective is just mining/resource extraction and not colonization of a habitable biosphere? They could have dropped a big rock from space, killing the natives AND clearing all that annoying vegetation as well. Problem solved, and no need for some stupid tree-hugger movie where the evil military-industrial complex once again gets its tail kicked.

Gitzbitah wrote:
Would you agree with this?




Correlation does not imply causation.

it all make sense, hurry we need to resurrect Blackbeard

I suppose Mister Turbo10k doesn't know anything about the japanese godzilla myth & movies ;-)
Fact is, that Emmerich ignored some basic rules of the godzilla universe and did a less-than-mediocre "jurassic park" rip-off with a big name to get more attention than the movie originally deserved...hell, even jurassic park 2 was better (and it really sucked monkey balls ^^ ).

Orkeosaurus wrote:I don't know that there's an entire field of research saying that the world is ending.

(Well, a respectable field of research...)

Fine, discredit my life's work, see if I care



Meanwhile, I may have misinterpreted the earlier comment about the WWF as dismissing environmental concerns, not just dismissing end of the world claims. Feel free to ignore.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Albatross wrote:There was a series on Samuel Adams not so long ago that looked pretty good - it had Paul Giamatti in it, I think...
But yeah, an accurate film on the American War of Independence would be interesting. There was treachery, corruption, extreme violence, breath-taking hubris and propaganda on BOTH sides of the conflict - the american people (or should I say British colonists) were basically caught between two opposing ruling classes, neither of whom had their best interests at heart.

Good call, we don't get HBO here like you guys do (mostly that stuff shows up on regular cable eventually) so I'm still waiting to see Sam Adams. It does look really good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Turbo10k wrote:Truth: Accurate fims are boring. It is OK to spend 2650000000000000000000000000 dollars (any currency) on a film just to get cheesy sfx on a rusty hull of an oil tanker. Blue aliens are sexy.

A film doesn't have to be realistic to be good, but there's plenty of films out there that are realistic and also very good. Master and Commander was mentioned in this thread, and it's a cracking good film and a very realistic depiction of naval combat of the time. Rob Roy got all the details right and was still an excellent movie. I think Jarhead is pretty well regarded in terms of accuracy, and I thought it was really good. Was Black Hawk Down really realistic, it certainly felt it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Noble713 wrote:

Jimi Nemesis wrote:
In the trailers, is that an enormous wave dostruying the himalayas? Is there enough water on the freaking planet to do that?

I don't think so. I recall reading about some sort of near-indestructible vault of grain seeds (like a gene bank for the world's food supply) that is being built in some remote Scandinavian region. The article specifically mentioned that it was sited so that even if all the ice in the world melted the entrance would still be above sea level, and it was something like <1000m elevation. The Himalayas has >100 mountains of >7,200m according to Wiki. You'd probably need 10 Anarticas melting to drown them.

I'm not sure, but is the movie showing total sea levels rising over the Himalayas, or is it just showing a wave so massive that it temporarily rose over them? Because the latter would be somewhat plausible, assuming there were planet shattering geological forces at work. I mean, I'd think any geological event so great as to cause a wave so great it could overwhelm the Himalayas would be a planet killing event, but still.

Orkeosaurus wrote:Nothing stops the US Mail. Fething nothing.

That little boy was me!

Samuel Adams is available on DVD.

48. The guy from American Idol is doing a song for the movie.

Platuan4th wrote:

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Also the new AVATAR trailer was on beforehand.
So it isn't Pocohantas in space, it is corporate loggers/miners vs forest indians.
Enjoy...

Did you see "Dances with Smurfs" last night?

Yeah. i think it is kinda screwed up that they are bashing a movie that isnt even out yet.

Time honored tradition.

youbedead wrote:

Gitzbitah wrote:
Would you agree with this?




Correlation does not imply causation.

it all make sense, hurry we need to resurrect Blackbeard

You are aware the number of pirates had been rising right?

Sam Adams on DVD? I buy mine in 6 pack form (or 12 pack on occasion) in a bottle.

Would be very hard to drink in DVD format.

Waterworld was crap. Like Titanic. Very expensive to make with lots of fx but couldn't stomach more than 10 minutes of it (and I only stomached 10 mins of Titanic because the intro showing all the inner workings of the ships engine room and boilers was the best part of the almost 3 hour yawnfest).

I just watched 2012 two hours ago. OK film, plausible destruction and high quality SFX, but lacking a highly passionate storyline. In some ways, it is just a brainless succession of very well made I-trashed-your-neighbourhood scenes.

I rate it: Go watch it. Just don't wear 2012 shirts.

Flashman wrote:5. CGI

*sniff*

I smell film snobbery.

No, it's a valid point.

Like any other filming technique, the CGI should be there for the service of the story, not as the point of the film in itself.

garret wrote:Reason to watch.
1: it looks great and well great.

Huh?

sA

smiling Assassin wrote:

garret wrote:Reason to watch.
1: it looks great and well great.

Huh?

sA

Indeed.

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:

Also the new AVATAR trailer was on beforehand.
So it isn't Pocohantas in space, it is corporate loggers/miners vs forest indians.
Enjoy...

Reminds me of this:




really both are Pocohantas (at least the Disney version)in Space. John Smith saves the day.

Damn, I would really like to see a good SciFi movie that isn't all about us "Dirty Greedy Humans". I got my fill of that crap reading/watching Lord of the Rings.

I thought humans were fairly inspiring in those movies. I mean, Aragorn was human, and he was one of the most important characters. The human nations in the movie rallied against Sauron (although some joined him).

More in the books really. How all the evil was brought about by the greed of the human kings given the rings. Plus Saruman's fall and the Steward of Gondor being such an idiot.

Ah.

The best way to experience LOTR is to read the 1200 page 50th anniversary edition. Nurgleboy77 was right, all of this was caused but human greed, but not intentionally. Malekith, the god fallen from favour among his brothers, exploited human nature to turn his brother's creations against them. It worked, until he his successor got beaten up by HOBBIIIIIITS.

Funny, that's the exact edition I read! lol

excuse me guys but...I LIKED THE MOVIE THANKS VERY MUCH!

I really don't think you can blame Humans for being greedy when the only thing that stopped the Hobbits from taking over Middle Earth was that they never stopped preparing meals, eating, or clearing up afterwards.

Nurgleboy77 wrote:More in the books really. How all the evil was brought about by the greed of the human kings given the rings. Plus Saruman's fall and the Steward of Gondor being such an idiot.

Saruman wasn't human. Denethor WAS a douche though.

Just got back from 2012. I liked it. Does it have a weak and predictable plot? Of course it does! But visuals were Outstanding to watch on the big screen! Go see it to SEE it, not have it be some thought provoking master piece, and you'll enjoy it.

Because Creed will outflank the apocalypse and save the humanity!

Before flaming poor CGI trash, who actually watched 2012?

Fail? I'm sorry but i read all the posts and we got off topic like 4 times.
number 47!
.....................................................................are you serious how does that hapeen? OK SO AIR VECHILES BLOW UP APPARENTLY WHEN HIT BY WATER? ARE YOU SERIOUS REVERSE PHYSICS!