...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
A live action Chip 'n Dale makes no sense. Unless they intend to film the scenery only and CGI the characters, which still makes no sense. Alvin and the Chipmunks always interacted with human characters, as did the Smurfs, so a blend of animation and live action makes a certain sense. It has been a loooong time since I saw Rescue Rangers. I thought they only interacted with other animal characters. Maybe I'm mistaken. Did they interact with children, or perhaps Ranger Woodlore (of the Humphrey the Bear cartoons)?
If they want a animation/live action blend, Disney should do the Gummi Bears. That was a fun show with both human and magical characters.
A live action Chip 'n Dale makes no sense. Unless they intend to film the scenery only and CGI the characters, which still makes no sense. Alvin and the Chipmunks always interacted with human characters, as did the Smurfs, so a blend of animation and live action makes a certain sense. It has been a loooong time since I saw Rescue Rangers. I thought they only interacted with other animal characters. Maybe I'm mistaken. Did they interact with children, or perhaps Ranger Woodlore (of the Humphrey the Bear cartoons)?
If they want a animation/live action blend, Disney should do the Gummi Bears. That was a fun show with both human and magical characters.
I know I'm putting my man card at risk here, but what about a new Care Bears film...?
A live action Chip 'n Dale makes no sense. Unless they intend to film the scenery only and CGI the characters, which still makes no sense. Alvin and the Chipmunks always interacted with human characters, as did the Smurfs, so a blend of animation and live action makes a certain sense. It has been a loooong time since I saw Rescue Rangers. I thought they only interacted with other animal characters. Maybe I'm mistaken. Did they interact with children, or perhaps Ranger Woodlore (of the Humphrey the Bear cartoons)?
If they want a animation/live action blend, Disney should do the Gummi Bears. That was a fun show with both human and magical characters.
It sounds like they're planning a live action/CGI blend in the vein of those horrible Alvin and the Chipmunks movies.
And as I recall, the Rescue Rangers mostly worked for (and against) other animals and occasionally went around saving people without the people noticing them. This often resulted in them being imperiled by those they were trying to rescue. The only humans who ever noticed their activities were small children (who were ignored when they tried to alert grown-ups) and a few recurring villains such as Professor Nimnul.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
Nitpicking is a time-honored tradition of science fiction. Asking your readers not to worry about the "little things" is like asking a dog not to sniff at people's crotches. If there's something that appears to violate natural laws, then you can expect someone's going to point it out. That's just the way things are.
Religious films should be educational documentaries, not fictional dramas only loosely based on other people's beliefs for the sole purpose of making money from them.
I hope "Mary" sinks like the TRIBBLE it is. This is the same reason I didn't see "Noah".
And as I recall, the Rescue Rangers mostly worked for (and against) other animals and occasionally went around saving people without the people noticing them. This often resulted in them being imperiled by those they were trying to rescue. The only humans who ever noticed their activities were small children (who were ignored when they tried to alert grown-ups) and a few recurring villains such as Professor Nimnul.
Ah, yeah, I forgot Nimnul. Now I see why they want the "Alvin" treatment. Still don't think it will work.
I like the Smurfs idea. Why? Well, the first Smurf movie picked up at a relatively late point in their story, seeing an earlier point would be great! Also... Smurfette had a really messed up origin, and I don't see how making it into movie form could make it worse. :P I'd actually LOVE to see a movie take on THAT story. :P
People often ask me why I don't watch movies. This...this is why. I make an exception here and there (last movie I watched was ST 2009...in 2009) but never on a regular basis.
Guys.......remember that we are in America (or at least some of us) and the modern American viewer will watch just about any TRIBBLE that's put out there and call it epic when the film was just mindless action with bad acting or no plot whatsoever. However whenever they come out with one of those rare films that actually has a very good plot and good acting, the movie will always get bad reviews because it is too intelligent for the modern audience.
I've always imagined a couple hillbillies watching an intelligent movie and saying this:
*southern accent* "Did you understand this movie Billy sue? I ain't got no idea what was goin' on"
"I ain't getten it either Billy Bob, you should go write one of yer bad movie reviews".
Hollywood is out of ideas and desperately reaching. There are plenty of creative writers and thinkers with great ideas wanting a shot, but those in charge are stuck in some kind of weird Quickcash zone or Get-rich-quick scheme. Has the mafia taken over? Is Cousin Paulie running things?
I'm definitely sick of reboots and prequels. When will the pain end?
I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
I'm not opposed to a reboot or a prequel. The project just has to have a clear purpose and bring something to the audience its predecessors never had.
One could argue that Hamlet has been, ah, done to death. But each retelling here allows a team of actors to bring a fresh interpretation. And I'd argue that "retelling" is a reboot, of sorts. In a reboot, certain things are kept (the script in this case), and other things change, like the staging, costumes, timeline, etc. If I'd said "Olivier did the defining Hamlet, no more need be done" we'd lose interpretations from Mel Gibson (1990), Kenneth Branagh (1996), Ethan Hawke (2000), and David Tennant (2009, with Patrick Stewart by the way). Some you may not like, but others are excellent.
Had the world refused prequels, we'd never have works like The Deerslayer by James Fenimore Cooper, written last of his five Natty Bumppo "Leatherstocking Tales" books, although it actually tells the first story of the character.
I am opposed to a cheap hash made for a quick buck. Sometimes, a reboot is in order to clear the mess that was left by such action. I, for example, hope for a serious effort to be made at restarting the Green Hornet, a favorite character through all iterations except this last movie.
One could argue that Hamlet has been, ah, done to death. But each retelling here allows a team of actors to bring a fresh interpretation.
I'm all for multiple adaptations. One director might capture an essence of a work that another director missed. Some directors end up making a mess of things, and another director has to reboot the story to fix it. And some later adaptations might outshine the older versions. That's all well and good.
However, Hollywood is on this reboot/prequel fad and they're wearing it out. It's like producers are going through the archives, looking for the winning lottery number, and in the meantime producing duds and mediocrity. With a better product, they might get away with it, but that's not what we're getting.
Religious films should be educational documentaries, not fictional dramas only loosely based on other people's beliefs for the sole purpose of making money from them.
I hope "Mary" sinks like the TRIBBLE it is. This is the same reason I didn't see "Noah".
Isn't that just the basis for religion anyway .
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
centersolace
Member Posts: 11,178 Arc User
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM7C0GLclJk how about this one? ^^
I got as far as #6 and I died inside.
Now this is my brain.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
If they want a animation/live action blend, Disney should do the Gummi Bears. That was a fun show with both human and magical characters.
I know I'm putting my man card at risk here, but what about a new Care Bears film...?
*Backs up slowly...*
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOAHghSHR_NVRJJSiY6VQ_g
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
It sounds like they're planning a live action/CGI blend in the vein of those horrible Alvin and the Chipmunks movies.
And as I recall, the Rescue Rangers mostly worked for (and against) other animals and occasionally went around saving people without the people noticing them. This often resulted in them being imperiled by those they were trying to rescue. The only humans who ever noticed their activities were small children (who were ignored when they tried to alert grown-ups) and a few recurring villains such as Professor Nimnul.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
I'm just going to pretend that none of these exist which will preserve my childhood.
Joined January 2009
R.I.P
I hope "Mary" sinks like the TRIBBLE it is. This is the same reason I didn't see "Noah".
CURSE YOU, HOLLYWOOD!!!!!
"Care Bears"? *STARE* :mad:
Ah, yeah, I forgot Nimnul. Now I see why they want the "Alvin" treatment. Still don't think it will work.
I've had to do that ever since the so called "Green Hornet" film came out.
My character Tsin'xing
Mine Trap Supporter
I've always imagined a couple hillbillies watching an intelligent movie and saying this:
*southern accent* "Did you understand this movie Billy sue? I ain't got no idea what was goin' on"
"I ain't getten it either Billy Bob, you should go write one of yer bad movie reviews".
I'm definitely sick of reboots and prequels. When will the pain end?
One could argue that Hamlet has been, ah, done to death. But each retelling here allows a team of actors to bring a fresh interpretation. And I'd argue that "retelling" is a reboot, of sorts. In a reboot, certain things are kept (the script in this case), and other things change, like the staging, costumes, timeline, etc. If I'd said "Olivier did the defining Hamlet, no more need be done" we'd lose interpretations from Mel Gibson (1990), Kenneth Branagh (1996), Ethan Hawke (2000), and David Tennant (2009, with Patrick Stewart by the way). Some you may not like, but others are excellent.
Had the world refused prequels, we'd never have works like The Deerslayer by James Fenimore Cooper, written last of his five Natty Bumppo "Leatherstocking Tales" books, although it actually tells the first story of the character.
I am opposed to a cheap hash made for a quick buck. Sometimes, a reboot is in order to clear the mess that was left by such action. I, for example, hope for a serious effort to be made at restarting the Green Hornet, a favorite character through all iterations except this last movie.
You guys do know that this also opens up the inevitable TRIBBLE parodies of said live action movies right?
:: sits back down and stares at the floor ::
(UFP) Ragnar
I'm all for multiple adaptations. One director might capture an essence of a work that another director missed. Some directors end up making a mess of things, and another director has to reboot the story to fix it. And some later adaptations might outshine the older versions. That's all well and good.
However, Hollywood is on this reboot/prequel fad and they're wearing it out. It's like producers are going through the archives, looking for the winning lottery number, and in the meantime producing duds and mediocrity. With a better product, they might get away with it, but that's not what we're getting.
:eek:
Why would....that is completely....no one even mentioned....
*slowly backs away*
-Leonard Nimoy, RIP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gZ6-6RbSEg
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Isn't that just the basis for religion anyway
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!