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.

 thenoobbomb wrote:
The one with the Neanderthal?

Does that classify as "mocking god"..? Alright then..

God is very sensitive, his father wasn't there for him when he was a child and the other kids picked on him because he was fat.


Also the movie was about what I expected after seeing the trailer.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
Movie pisses me off because it perpetuates that stupid myth about "oh you only use 10% of your brain HYURRDURR".

This totally is why I refuse to see it. Once I saw them plop out that turd in the dialogue, I was like.. nope.

This.

Agreed.

Not seen the film, but the trailer looks amusing, it's pretty obviously scifi action jollies, not serious drama. Did you hate Starwars as the Force is scientifically implausible? Just wondering...

A mystic, unexplainable mystic power isn't the same as propagating old proven falsehoods.

 Ahtman wrote:
A mystic, unexplainable mystic power isn't the same as propagating old proven falsehoods.

This.

 Ahtman wrote:
A mystic, unexplainable mystic power isn't the same as propagating old proven falsehoods.

"Mystic, unexplainable power." Midi-chlorians say hi... Always thought it would be a cool plot for a comic if the Empire captured a Jedi and "harvested" them to make Midi-chlorian injections and equip a special forces unit of "Force Troopers."

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled conversation.

 dementedwombat wrote:
Midi-chlorians say hi...

And did you notice how well that was received? Did they ever come up again even in the animated shows?

 Ahtman wrote:

 dementedwombat wrote:
Midi-chlorians say hi...

And did you notice how well that was received? Did they ever come up again even in the animated shows?

I thought they were pretty cool, mainly for the reasons discussed in my last post. I also really liked Jar-Jar and Episode II was my favorite movie in the series

 dementedwombat wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
A mystic, unexplainable mystic power isn't the same as propagating old proven falsehoods.

"Mystic, unexplainable power." Midi-chlorians say hi... Always thought it would be a cool plot for a comic if the Empire captured a Jedi and "harvested" them to make Midi-chlorian injections and equip a special forces unit of "Force Troopers."

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled conversation.

The Reborn were a deadly force of Dark Jedi of the Empire Reborn faction. An accomplishment of the dream of artificial infusion of the Force into individuals, the Reborn warriors were the instrument of Lord Hethrir's master plan, bringing back the ideals of Emperor Palpatine, the ways of the Sith and the Galactic Empire itself.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Reborn

It's been done, albeit slightly differently then you suggested.

 trexmeyer wrote:

The Reborn were a deadly force of Dark Jedi of the Empire Reborn faction. An accomplishment of the dream of artificial infusion of the Force into individuals, the Reborn warriors were the instrument of Lord Hethrir's master plan, bringing back the ideals of Emperor Palpatine, the ways of the Sith and the Galactic Empire itself.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Reborn

It's been done, albeit slightly differently then you suggested.

Figures. I'm not really a huge follower of the Star Wars universe, but it stands to reason that by this point if there's some kind of story idea that can be vaguely shoehorned into said universe, there will be a book/comic/game about it.

 dementedwombat wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 dementedwombat wrote:
Midi-chlorians say hi...

And did you notice how well that was received? Did they ever come up again even in the animated shows?

I thought they were pretty cool, mainly for the reasons discussed in my last post. I also really liked Jar-Jar and Episode II was my favorite movie in the series

Being an outlier doesn't mean you couldn't have noticed that people generally thought it was stupid.

 Ouze wrote:
In retrospect only being able to come up with 3 good roles in a career spanning 20 years is sort of making me reconsider my defense.

Going over imdb and picking out the ones I've seen her do well in, I'd add Vicky Christina Barcelona, Lost in Translation, and The Prestige. Which isn't a huge list, and I'd say she's more good in those films than incredible, but I also can't think of anything where she's been weak.

In fact, going through that list on imdb it's interesting to note how few films she's been in in general, and there were no big budget films where she was the main star. Her stuff is almost all ensemble, and where she was the lead it was in smaller, arty stuff. Other than The Island (where she co-starred with Ewan MacGregor and a lot of baysplosions), Lucy is actually her first attempt to carry a big budget mainstream film herself, and despite the weak reviews and silly premise it seems to have done pretty well... which means a Black Widow film starts looking like a solid bet.

 curran12 wrote:
Movie pisses me off because it perpetuates that stupid myth about "oh you only use 10% of your brain HYURRDURR".

Fun fact: The origin of that 'fact' is from a an offhand remark at a cocktail party. True story.

This is how someone explained it to me
"You only use 10% at a time, you cant Write a paper and do Calculus at the same time while texting"

 Ahtman wrote:
A mystic, unexplainable mystic power isn't the same as propagating old proven falsehoods.

Yep. It's funny how it works, because lots of things in movies are silly or implausible but don't have the same problem. I love the new Planet of the Apes movies, but nothing going on in there is really very plausible at all. And lots of people loved Pacific Rim, but the idea of building giant robots to punch giant monsters is extremely silly.

I think it isn't so much the plausibility of the idea, but the fact that it's such an old, disproven cliche. Basing the film on pure gibberish would have been better, such as in Limitless. But instead using that old cliche just looks lazy, and given the film seems to then basically be her getting superpowers and slaughtering loads of extras before ending with some kind of ascension thing, it looks like the script never stopped being lazy.

 Commander Cain wrote:
I saw the Lucy a while back and was quite uninspired by it. While the plot in general was very good the super duper magic powers just took all of the realism out of the movie for me.

If you are looking for a movie with a similar theme I highly recommend watching Limitless which is far more believable and engaging to the audience.

Came here to say this. Have my exalts.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
Movie pisses me off because it perpetuates that stupid myth about "oh you only use 10% of your brain HYURRDURR".

Fun fact: The origin of that 'fact' is from a an offhand remark at a cocktail party. True story.

This is how someone explained it to me
"You only use 10% at a time, you cant Write a paper and do Calculus at the same time while texting"

That is not even close to not using 10% of your brain at a time. Brain use =/= multitasking. Actually, multitasking is generally a good wya to do two things poorly rather than one thing well.

Let me put it to you this way:

If we only use 10% of our brain, why did we evolve the other 90%?

I thought most people used 100% of their brain.

I had a choice between Lucy and GotG.

I chose Lucy.

Yes, the science is loopy (Really, an organ that uses 20% of your energy is something you only use 10% of?).

But really, is the science in a comic book movie any better?

Besides - Miss Scarlett is hot (wife agrees).

The rat with a gun isn't.
The talking tree thing isn't.

I don't expect rational science from a Luc Besson movie. I expect pretty.

 chromedog wrote:
I had a choice between Lucy and GotG.

I chose Lucy.

If everything were done the same and based entirely on surface level readings we wouldn't need different books, songs, and films; how something is done and presented is very important; I don't buy the argument that because both are implausible they must therefor be equal.

Thanks to Guardians of the Galaxy I now think talking raccoons and trees are awesome.

 chromedog wrote:
I had a choice between Lucy and GotG.

I chose Lucy.

Yes, the science is loopy (Really, an organ that uses 20% of your energy is something you only use 10% of?).

But really, is the science in a comic book movie any better?

Besides - Miss Scarlett is hot (wife agrees).

The rat with a gun isn't.
The talking tree thing isn't.

I don't expect rational science from a Luc Besson movie. I expect pretty.

Ancient Buddha say no choice necessary. See both.
GotG tickets reserved for this weekend. SoCo on the rocks and killer raccoons, its going to be a bumpy flight!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ma55ter_fett wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:
The one with the Neanderthal?

Does that classify as "mocking god"..? Alright then..

God is very sensitive, his father wasn't there for him when he was a child and the other kids picked on him because he was fat.


Also the movie was about what I expected after seeing the trailer.

God really hates it when you mnake fun of her waistline. She'll make fun of your coastline, with a hurricane.

Why choose? Because at $25 a ticket each, I'm choosy.
And that's general admin - NOT "gold class".

Unlike the other comicbook superhero movies that have come out - I have NO idea what GotG is supposed to be about. I am NOT in it's target market demographic. It generally can't be anything BUT disappointing to me as a result.

EVERYONE knows superman, batman, etc. I don't think I know anyone who knows what a groot is.
Starlord to me is the comic where Judge Dredd started.

I've seen THREE of the marvel supers movies in the last 10 years. Three.
Iron man, Iron man3 and Avengers. IM was the good one out of them (RDJ sleepwalked through IM3 and Avengers was too much of them beating up on each other and NOT being the team thing.
I suppose they'd be fine if you were an actual avid fan of the genre/product lines. I'm not.

There is some incredibly spurious reasoning going on there. Not the "why I made a choice", anyone gets that*, but the rest of it is weapons grade bolagnium.



*We don't have "Gold Class" theater tickets so no idea what that is.

 chromedog wrote:
Why choose? Because at $25 a ticket each, I'm choosy.
And that's general admin - NOT "gold class".

Unlike the other comicbook superhero movies that have come out - I have NO idea what GotG is supposed to be about. I am NOT in it's target market demographic. It generally can't be anything BUT disappointing to me as a result.

EVERYONE knows superman, batman, etc. I don't think I know anyone who knows what a groot is.
Starlord to me is the comic where Judge Dredd started.

I've seen THREE of the marvel supers movies in the last 10 years. Three.
Iron man, Iron man3 and Avengers. IM was the good one out of them (RDJ sleepwalked through IM3 and Avengers was too much of them beating up on each other and NOT being the team thing.
I suppose they'd be fine if you were an actual avid fan of the genre/product lines. I'm not.

I've got to agree on this subject. The first Iron Man was the last movie I've ever seen in a theater. I watched Iron Man 2 on DVD recently. Was not a fan of how it was basically "The Avengers 0.5".

 Cheesecat wrote:
I thought most people used 100% of their brain.

Just not the people who wrote the script for Lucy.

 chromedog wrote:
Why choose? Because at $25 a ticket each, I'm choosy.
And that's general admin - NOT "gold class".

Unlike the other comicbook superhero movies that have come out - I have NO idea what GotG is supposed to be about. I am NOT in it's target market demographic. It generally can't be anything BUT disappointing to me as a result.

EVERYONE knows superman, batman, etc. I don't think I know anyone who knows what a groot is.
Starlord to me is the comic where Judge Dredd started.

I've seen THREE of the marvel supers movies in the last 10 years. Three.
Iron man, Iron man3 and Avengers. IM was the good one out of them (RDJ sleepwalked through IM3 and Avengers was too much of them beating up on each other and NOT being the team thing.
I suppose they'd be fine if you were an actual avid fan of the genre/product lines. I'm not.

Holy carp, $25 a ticket is ludicrous. I will stop thinking a ticket is expensive when it's only $6 where I live.

Unless you are talking about Movie + Popcorn + Drink, in which case that's not the movies fault you be a needy dude.

 chromedog wrote:
Why choose? Because at $25 a ticket each, I'm choosy.
And that's general admin - NOT "gold class".
.

I went to the movies the other day at 10$, got a drink for 3.
For a total of 13$ I saw a movie at Imax.
I do not see these outrageous ticket prices.

 chromedog wrote:
Unlike the other comicbook superhero movies that have come out - I have NO idea what GotG is supposed to be about.

This is actually a pretty good reason to go see it. They're such a niche group that the presumption is no one knows who they are, and so there isn't a complicated backstory you need to know. I mean, it helps if you know what the infinity gems are, but you totally can enjoy the movie coming in on the ground floor and never having heard of Starlord before*.

I think it was probably the best movie this summer so far, and I've never read any of the comics and only knew one of the characters, super vaguely.

My wife loved it.

 Cheesecat wrote:
I thought most people used 100% of their brain.

Don't you get a seizure when using 100% of your brain?

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
I thought most people used 100% of their brain.

Don't you get a seizure when using 100% of your brain?

At the same time.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I went to the movies the other day at 10$, got a drink for 3.
For a total of 13$ I saw a movie at Imax.
I do not see these outrageous ticket prices.

chromedog is Australian, the prices are different here. That said, outside of gold class I don't know anyone who's paid anything near $25 to see a movie. You might pay around $15 for a non-concession ticket, but that's only if you're silly enough to ignore the countless ways to access a reduced ticket price - there's loads of clubs and gold cards and all sorts of nonsense that are free of cheap to join that will drop your movie ticket down to about $10.