"80-year-old grandpa who has been slowly ruining the legacy of his filmography" isn't really someone whose political opinions I trust very much. I don't think I'd even trust his memory of last week.
To be fair, I think Scott has always been a bit of an idiot that lucked out with his works. Kind of a film equivalent of Alan Moore, where he doesn't actually understand what made his films as good as they were just like Moore doesn't understand what made his comics good.
Potentially. I think Todd understands why people liked Joker, but he didn't like the people that were agreeing with him so he did the sequel out of spite. It's less disconnect with the material and more disconnect with people.
Breaking down the role, the director said that his version of Macrinus "was a prisoner of war — probably at a North African state — and actually was taken to Rome probably as a gladiator. Survived. Got free. Got into the business of maybe making wine and bread. He evolved into a very rich merchant selling shit to the Roman armies — food, oil, wine, cloth, weapons, everything."
"He maybe had a million men spread around Europe. So he was a billionaire at the time," Scott continued. "He's also a gangster — very close to Trump. A clever gangster."
Why the fuck is an 87 year old talking like a more retarded millennial? I know he's not the writer, but this still just comes across as so weak. Speak with some conviction, and leave out the guesswork. Or, if that stuff is important, talk to the writers so you can see what they were envisioning, as far as fleshing everything out goes.
Also, people love "clever gangsters." Not sure where the dunk is. Their version of Trump might be even cooler than the real-life version.
Wow, are those people retarded. Hamill and Takei are really bad, not familiar with Reiner but...Stephen King is like Lord of the Retards. King seems to be a True Believer.
Yeah King is so egregious, it feels like a performance. He's got some filthy closets he doesn't want opened. The kid orgy at the end of IT probably shoulda been a hint for all of us, decades ago.
The kid orgy at the end of IT probably shoulda been a hint for all of us, decades ago.
"Nooo, you chuds! It's not an orgy! All the guys just run a train on the only girl there so that the evil white man faced monster doesn't get them all!"
... 🤔
Do they make industrial sized woodchippers? Asking for a movie industry.
He got caught trying to strongarm his former 18 y/o assistant from suing him for sexual assault. Which has lead to a lot of women coming forward with the fact that he assaulted them and then bribed them into silence.
On the one hand, innocent until proven guilty, and we've seen how lies compound and the "victims" flow out of the woodwork, and how they have massive things to gain by being victims. On the other hand...this wouldn't surprise me either. I've enjoyed some of Gaiman's works, he spun a good story before he went even more woke...but he was always a bit of a weirdo, and I seem to recall there being rumors even years ago. So, yeah, wouldn't be shocked if he was a total scumbag with women.
Breaking down the role, the director said that his version of Macrinus "was a prisoner of war — probably at a North African state — and actually was taken to Rome probably as a gladiator. Survived. Got free. Got into the business of maybe making wine and bread. He evolved into a very rich merchant selling shit to the Roman armies — food, oil, wine, cloth, weapons, everything."
It's a spoiler so be warned if anyone actually cares.
Macrinus wants to topple Rome because he was a slave of Marcus Aurelius. He mocks the dream of Rome envisioned by dead/old (white) men and wants Rome destroyed because he's butthurt. Then the grandson of his master kills him and thwarts his plan. There's something funny there.
That would canonize these comments. Canon opens it up to the rules of plot and continuity, and detracts from the work permanently if it fails to gel properly with the rest of the established canon.
Saying maybe allows it to be interpretation instead. Which means its "true" until someone points out how it doesn't work within the story or history, then its easily dismissed as just implied or inspiration instead of hard truth.
Its the "nose on, nose off" Jon Stewart method applied to creating works.
Culture. Women and normie/ NPC men get periodic updates for their mindsets. As such, people who were articulate decades ago now talk like valley girls.
So is that why it flopped? Beyond being a sequel that was wholly not needed, you just focused on owning Trump meant you couldn't make a film on pure merit alone.
That might apply to other industries, but in Hollywood?
Absolutely not. This is the industry filled with true believers who demand their opinions be heard and taken seriously as "artists and activists." The moment any of them get power, money or control they will make something inevitably Woke.
When comics and video games were still just existing and making things for profit/passion, movies had been happily Woke (for their day) without end.
Has he ever been asked his thoughts on the ending of Mass Effect 3? Because it is literally the same ending to Deus Ex from 2000, just swap Helios for The Catalyst.
It's an absolute yawn fest. Nothing makes sense and their need to shoe horn DEI characters (stronk empowered wahmen) falls flat as they end up as unlikable, unrelatable and wooden.
Their feminist hatred of white men competes with their need for white man protagonist hero to make money for them but again that falls flat because they cannot give him the character development that is needed like the first movie.
FTFY
"80-year-old grandpa who has been slowly ruining the legacy of his filmography" isn't really someone whose political opinions I trust very much. I don't think I'd even trust his memory of last week.
To be fair, I think Scott has always been a bit of an idiot that lucked out with his works. Kind of a film equivalent of Alan Moore, where he doesn't actually understand what made his films as good as they were just like Moore doesn't understand what made his comics good.
The constant director's cuts prove that fairly well.
Blade Runner really is the best example that Scott doesn't understand his own films.
Spending the 80s yakked out of your gourd will do that to you.
Like that Todd Phillips douchebag and Joker (before he created it’s abomination of a sequel)
Potentially. I think Todd understands why people liked Joker, but he didn't like the people that were agreeing with him so he did the sequel out of spite. It's less disconnect with the material and more disconnect with people.
Why the fuck is an 87 year old talking like a more retarded millennial? I know he's not the writer, but this still just comes across as so weak. Speak with some conviction, and leave out the guesswork. Or, if that stuff is important, talk to the writers so you can see what they were envisioning, as far as fleshing everything out goes.
Also, people love "clever gangsters." Not sure where the dunk is. Their version of Trump might be even cooler than the real-life version.
No idea, but ...
George Takei
Stephen King
Rob Reiner
Mark Hamill
it's not exactly an uncommon thing. I just assume that they're all pedophiles at this point.
Fair point.
Wow, are those people retarded. Hamill and Takei are really bad, not familiar with Reiner but...Stephen King is like Lord of the Retards. King seems to be a True Believer.
Yeah King is so egregious, it feels like a performance. He's got some filthy closets he doesn't want opened. The kid orgy at the end of IT probably shoulda been a hint for all of us, decades ago.
"Nooo, you chuds! It's not an orgy! All the guys just run a train on the only girl there so that the evil white
manfaced monster doesn't get them all!"... 🤔
Do they make industrial sized woodchippers? Asking for a movie industry.
looks at Neil Gaiman and his current run of people noticing Yeah, it's safe to say that most of that crop of writers has some skeletons.
What's going on with Gayman now?
He got caught trying to strongarm his former 18 y/o assistant from suing him for sexual assault. Which has lead to a lot of women coming forward with the fact that he assaulted them and then bribed them into silence.
On the one hand, innocent until proven guilty, and we've seen how lies compound and the "victims" flow out of the woodwork, and how they have massive things to gain by being victims. On the other hand...this wouldn't surprise me either. I've enjoyed some of Gaiman's works, he spun a good story before he went even more woke...but he was always a bit of a weirdo, and I seem to recall there being rumors even years ago. So, yeah, wouldn't be shocked if he was a total scumbag with women.
There are many other ways of symbolizing leaving childhood behind that don't involve sex.
Are you talking people who don't even run their own Twitter accounts
Maybe it's a terminally online thing?
Maybe that should have been the movie.
Denzel Washington as Nicolas Cage as Lord of War, in Rome?
...I'd watch it.
A black African warlord flashing his bling in the colosseum and speaking “New Yorker” to all the Romans.
“Yo, we killin’ Caesar, you feel me?”
lol, if that doesn’t win the Oscar, I dunno what will.
It's a spoiler so be warned if anyone actually cares.
Macrinus wants to topple Rome because he was a slave of Marcus Aurelius. He mocks the dream of Rome envisioned by dead/old (white) men and wants Rome destroyed because he's butthurt. Then the grandson of his master kills him and thwarts his plan. There's something funny there.
That would canonize these comments. Canon opens it up to the rules of plot and continuity, and detracts from the work permanently if it fails to gel properly with the rest of the established canon.
Saying maybe allows it to be interpretation instead. Which means its "true" until someone points out how it doesn't work within the story or history, then its easily dismissed as just implied or inspiration instead of hard truth.
Its the "nose on, nose off" Jon Stewart method applied to creating works.
That's what you do to have a job on hollywood. You have to be fake and/or gay. Ridley is aiming for both.
Culture. Women and normie/ NPC men get periodic updates for their mindsets. As such, people who were articulate decades ago now talk like valley girls.
So is that why it flopped? Beyond being a sequel that was wholly not needed, you just focused on owning Trump meant you couldn't make a film on pure merit alone.
"Orange man bad" is so 2016, clearly audiences are suffering from Trump fatigue.
lol, jk. Leftists are never going to tire out from TDS, even when they are literally exhausted from doing so.
Do you think they'll stop if BlackRock and Vanguard are ever coaxed into cutting off the ESG bucks that fund this woke slop?
That might apply to other industries, but in Hollywood?
Absolutely not. This is the industry filled with true believers who demand their opinions be heard and taken seriously as "artists and activists." The moment any of them get power, money or control they will make something inevitably Woke.
When comics and video games were still just existing and making things for profit/passion, movies had been happily Woke (for their day) without end.
Deus Ex?
Has he ever been asked his thoughts on the ending of Mass Effect 3? Because it is literally the same ending to Deus Ex from 2000, just swap Helios for The Catalyst.
William Gibson turning out to just be a stereotypical boomer democrat is possibly the most severe media-related disappointment in my life.
Living rent free.
Will Trump be their new metric for movies?
New? 🤔
It's an absolute yawn fest. Nothing makes sense and their need to shoe horn DEI characters (stronk empowered wahmen) falls flat as they end up as unlikable, unrelatable and wooden.
Their feminist hatred of white men competes with their need for white man protagonist hero to make money for them but again that falls flat because they cannot give him the character development that is needed like the first movie.
should have retired.