Grand Prix Rejects

Disney announced to their shareholders today that Toy Story 4 will be out in 2017. I don't know. Each one gets better, but man, I liked where they had it ended.

Wallio wrote:Disney announced to their shareholders today that Toy Story 4 will be out in 2017. I don't know. Each one gets better, but man, I liked where they had it ended.

Seconded. Emotional and fitting. BTW I'm going out with a friend to (hopefully!) see Interstellar tomorrow. Should be spectacular, plus the later trailers have the most epic music... EVER!!!!!!!!!!

If anybody wants me I'll be watching this over and over again....

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=erLk59H86ww

CoopsII wrote:If anybody wants me I'll be watching this over and over again....

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=erLk59H86ww

The correct approach to that movie is to have low expectations. That way it's impossible to be disappointed when you see the movie.



Screw that! The trailer is amazing! CAN'T WAIT FOR THE END OF 2015!!!!!!!!!!

Pointless lens flare? Check.

Dizzying cinematography as a substitute for an actual excuting scene? Also check.

Self-important monologue? Check.

Conclusion: it's a JJ Abrams film, alright.

Captain Hammer wrote:Pointless lens flare? Check.

Dizzying cinematography as a substitute for an actual excuting scene? Also check.

Self-important monologue? Check.

Conclusion: it's a JJ Abrams film, alright.

Damn you have you not seen that lightsaber with the extra sticky out bits?!?! With one deft flick of my hand I deflect your pooh-poohing of this movie

Simtek wrote:

CoopsII wrote:

Captain Hammer wrote:Pointless lens flare? Check.

Dizzying cinematography as a substitute for an actual excuting scene? Also check.

Self-important monologue? Check.

Conclusion: it's a JJ Abrams film, alright.

Damn you have you not seen that lightsaber with the extra sticky out bits?!?! With one deft flick of my hand I deflect your pooh-poohing of this movie

That's about the only thing that bothered me about the trailer because it seems very impractical for a lightsaber to have a hilt that's also made of plasma. Isn't there a greater risk for the user to get a hand injury? Apart from that I can't wait for this to come out!

I thought it was a Swiss Army lightsaber...you've got the main fight-y bit, one is to cut your toenails and the other is to open up a bottle of Qui-Gon Gin.

Don't you mean.......................Sith army lightsaber?

CoopsII wrote:Don't you mean.......................Sith army lightsaber?

Oh dear...

dr-baker wrote:

CoopsII wrote:Don't you mean.......................Sith army lightsaber?

Oh dear...

Don't you mean..............ba dum Sith?

Simtek wrote:That's about the only thing that bothered me about the trailer because it seems very impractical for a lightsaber to have a hilt that's also made of plasma. Isn't there a greater risk for the user to get a hand injury?

There's some online speculation that the hilt may actually be some kind of exhaust function as the blade of the light broad sword appears much more ragged and powerful hence the power overspill.

CoopsII wrote:With one deft flick of my hand I deflect your pooh-poohing of this movie

You'll be right at home, then - pretty much everything Abrams has stuck his name on could be described as "pooh-pooh".

Captain Hammer wrote:

CoopsII wrote:With one deft flick of my hand I deflect your pooh-poohing of this movie

You'll be right at home, then - pretty much everything Abrams has stuck his name on could be described as "pooh-pooh".

I find your lack of faith disturbing......






....how's your throat feeling? Did it work?

Why am I getting the feeling that it's not going to live up to the hype? Maybe I'm still scarred by episodes 1, and 2. (And 3 to a lesser extent.) Or maybe because I wasn't impressed with the Star Trek reboot. On the plus side though, I did like the trailer. So maybe there is a new hope.

DOSBoot wrote:Why am I getting the feeling that it's not going to live up to the hype? Maybe I'm still scarred by episodes 1, and 2. (And 3 to a lesser extent.) Or maybe because I wasn't impressed with the Star Trek reboot. On the plus side though, I did like the trailer. So maybe there is a new hope.

I enjoyed the Star Trek movies originally but now I feel a little duped. The reboots were like an affair; good fun, new and exciting but after a while you realise thats all there is to it and thats nothing substantial thats going to last. I saw no love in the new Star Treks, just shiny pretty froth. To be fair to the director he never claimed to be a Star Trek fan so with that in mind I guess the films could've been worse (look at what Stuart Baird, who never watched the show, did to Nemesis). With Star Wars, however, Abrams is a fan like me so I have high hopes it will be a geek fest.

A teaser trailer for the next Terminator film is out. I am so going to see that now.

good_Ralf wrote:A teaser trailer for the next Terminator film is out. I am so going to see that now.

Heres a fuller trailer - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25YTRwOjTCg
Yeah, I think it looks promising. Setting it in the 80s is a nice touch. Plus, you know, her from Game Of Thrones, hubba hubba etc etc.

The twenty-fourth James Bond film was announced as "SPECTRE" last night. As usual, it was a secretive affair, with only the title and the cast announced - Daniel Craig is staying as Bond, with Christoph Waltz as the villain, Franz Oberhauser, and Lea Seydoux and Monica Bellucci as the female leads, Madeleine Swann and Lucia Sciarra.

SPECTRE seems to be hinting at some kind of relation to OHMSS. Like with the bullet hole in the glass, the mere existence of SPECTRE in the first place, the fact that the some of the filming and setting will be at a ski resort in Austria.

It's quite cool that from the second half of Skyfall they're bringing back a lot of the old themes of classic Bond. I hope that they don't end up relying on them and just simply repeat them with laziness. Take what was good about the Connery era, and combine it with the abilities filmmakers have in this era (but don't make it a CGI fest).

EON have said they won't be remaking any films. There may be some acknowledgement of OHMSS, but I doubt they will go back over scorched earth. Especially by redoing the Tracy storyline so soon after a) Vesper's death and b) Bond's disappearance while on a mission and subsequent reemergence.

DOSBoot wrote:Why am I getting the feeling that it's not going to live up to the hype? Maybe I'm still scarred by episodes 1, and 2. (And 3 to a lesser extent.) Or maybe because I wasn't impressed with the Star Trek reboot. On the plus side though, I did like the trailer. So maybe there is a new hope.

Was I the only one to see what you did there?

Simtek wrote:So apparently Robert De Niro is playing the Old Man himself in an upcoming Ferrari biopic. And apparently Clint Eastwood has been approached to direct. I'm keeping my eye on this one.

Dayum... That is some promising stuff.


Away from racing movies, is anyone interested in Child 44? The book was gripping.

Simtek wrote:So apparently Robert De Niro is playing the Old Man himself in an upcoming Ferrari biopic. And apparently Clint Eastwood has been approached to direct. I'm keeping my eye on this one.

Thanks to Rush (not the prog-rock group) this has the potential to be a great movie and it's about time Bobby did a decent bit of work, this role was made for him.

That is all.

Yesterday, I went to see Hot Tub Time Machine 2. I was the only person in this screening (maybe because it was mid-afternoon on a weekday?). But they are reducing the number of viewings from about four to one per day from today so perhaps a box-office failure? And it was totally stupid and ridiculous. And for that reason alone, I liked it. If that were real-life, I would be running a mile and would have nothing to do with those guys, but it is just such a parody and removed from reality, that I could not help but smile/laugh at the sheer daftness of it all.

In short, so bad it's good in my book.

dr-baker wrote:Yesterday, I went to see Hot Tub Time Machine 2. I was the only person in this screening (maybe because it was mid-afternoon on a weekday?). But they are reducing the number of viewings from about four to one per day from today so perhaps a box-office failure? And it was totally stupid and ridiculous. And for that reason alone, I liked it. If that were real-life, I would be running a mile and would have nothing to do with those guys, but it is just such a parody and removed from reality, that I could not help but smile/laugh at the sheer daftness of it all.

In short, so bad it's good in my book.

I enjoyed the first one a lot, 7.5/10 imo. Great fun, cool characters and a somewhat original idea.
But it really was a kind of film I wouldn't have wanted to see getting a sequel.

Simtek wrote:

Rabbi Gordon wrote:

dr-baker wrote:Yesterday, I went to see Hot Tub Time Machine 2. I was the only person in this screening (maybe because it was mid-afternoon on a weekday?). But they are reducing the number of viewings from about four to one per day from today so perhaps a box-office failure? And it was totally stupid and ridiculous. And for that reason alone, I liked it. If that were real-life, I would be running a mile and would have nothing to do with those guys, but it is just such a parody and removed from reality, that I could not help but smile/laugh at the sheer daftness of it all.

In short, so bad it's good in my book.

I enjoyed the first one a lot, 7.5/10 imo. Great fun, cool characters and a somewhat original idea.
But it really was a kind of film I wouldn't have wanted to see getting a sequel.

Indeed. The first time I saw it I was expecting a terrible film just from looking at the title. I was taken aback by how good it was given the concept. When I first read about the sequel, I was hesitant, and when I read that John Cusack wasn't going to be in it, that turned me off it completely, though that won't stop me from seeing it if it happens to be on TV sometime

What you probably expected of the first film, well, it's possibly what the second film is. If/when it's on TV, have low expectations. Then lower them a bit further. To zero. Then you won't be disappointed. And it might be fun to actually enjoy its badness.

Saw Fast and Furious 7 a couple days ago. Pretty much what you expect if you have seen the other ones. Plenty of ridiculous, but entertaining action to keep it worth watching. As well as a good sendoff for the late Paul Walker. I give it a 7 out of 10 in my book.

Simtek wrote:

DOSBoot wrote:Also your thoughts on this.

I am really tired of all these superhero movies, no matter how good they are, but they are guaranteed to make a profit, so it's no surprise that Hollywood continues to churn them out. With that opinion that I'm sure has been said countless times over and over again on the internet out of the way, it looks... OK.

What about Ben Affleck playing Batman?

I was iffy about it at first, but like you I'll give my final thoughts on it when the film comes.

I share Simtek's view on all these endless superhero films, but the trailer for this looks surprisingly good. Still have no idea what their problem is with each other. They should just get along or leave each other alone. They're not kids anymore.

Me and my family were having a session of watching a tonne of Hitchcock films over the last few nights. What I found interesting was that after watching "Rope", we were all pretty impressed with James Stewart's role in that film, because it's definitely something different to the role he usually plays in films. He seemed to suit it quite well to us, but looking it up on the internet, most people seem to have the opinion that he was unsuited and was rubbish in it. Is this an unpopular movie opinion, that James Stewart was really good in "Rope"?

Also Frenzy was surprisingly good, I'd recommend that to those who haven't seen it