That movie you just watched

[EvilEvoIX]

I ignore equations from the greatest minds in history because f*ck you that's why!!!

I ignore Einstein's equation for closed time loops created with immense gravity because Einstein is a hack.

I think hawking is a hack because math sucks!

I ignore the fact that time slows down even though it has been proven.  I also ignore the fact that time stops at relativistic speeds or at a singularity.

I don't understand that time can be manipulated.

I don't understand that time is a dimension

I know for a fact that the universe is infinite yet somehow it's expanding faster than the speed of light so I ignore my own contradictions.

I ignore the fact that there may be multiple universes.

I think a freezer is a time machine.

I think ice cubes are time travelers.

I site sources from Stallone movies.

[NecroPhile]

After some chatting yesterday, I had to rewatch The Ladies Man again last night.

Can I interest any of you sweet things in a fish sandwich?

[NightWolve]

Oh brother... OK, let's help EvilEmoX out yet again, Mr. Spaceman from Le 4th Dimension.

See, because you're douchey and inarticulate, I finally had to go find and read exactly what Hawking has been saying. Personally, I don't think you should speak for him again. You invoked his name, and mixed your own bullshit in with it which he doesn't agree with...

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/05/03/time-travel-possible-says-stephen-hawking/

1) "Backwards Time Travel"

Moving backwards is impossible, Hawking says, because it "violates a fundamental rule that cause comes before effect."

To review, I had said this earlier:

The idea of "traveling back in time" however is pure imagination, fiction, fantasy, Santa Claus level story telling, that's it... Great device for stories/movies, but yes, pure 100% fiction... There is no evidence of any powerful "universe recorder" of the past, much less a way to access it to change the world back to a previous time period, etc.

and it is vindicated.

Also, from http://www.hawking.org.uk/space-and-time-warps.html

Einstein's paper of 1905 seemed to rule out time travel into the past.

Agreement with Hawking (and with Einstein!), he's not one of these nutters! Traveling backwards in time is impossible like he says! Thank f--king goodness he's against promoting that delusion! So we're all good there! And to illustrate to people why that nonsense is impossible, I had described what it would take, knowing the position of every atom of the earth and being able to rearrange it back the way it was. Well, that's obviously impossible, no recorder device, and no arranger device. So we're done with that, and though Hawking doesn't go into detail, he states it's impossible and I agree.

To put it another way: "Time travel is not possible because there is no "past" to travel back to. The past already happened and is gone; it is not preserved in some kind of (excuse me) time capsule to be revisited. The past simply does not exist any more. The past is memory; the future is anticipation; only the present exists, and only in the present."


2) "Forward"

Once spaceships were built that could fly faster than the speed of light, a day on board would be equivalent to a year on Earth. That's because -- according to Einstein -- as objects accelerate through space, time slows down around them. Which also means that Hawking's theory only applies to moving "forwards" through time.

Now we're getting into reasonable science. I would say though, for accuracy, this is space travel and wouldn't use "time travel." Time is not a destination you can travel to, another solar system for exploration that might have lifeforms on it is! When you use "time travel" it connects to the fictional concept of wanting to change the past. So, how does that square with what I previously said to EmoX ?

Anyway, what you mention, that an astronaut's body might be slowed down a bit, slightly less heartbeats, slightly less breaths, slightly slowed chemical processes inside cells, etc. versus a human on this earth for the same amount of time, and that when he/she returns to earth they're slightly less aged is the same thing as the freezing concept.

Agreed. Traveling very fast slows body processes down, less breaths per min than if you were on earth, slower cell divisions and deaths, etc. so you will age less. How much, exactly per a mathematical equation speaking for your biological clock ? That I dunno, and I doubt it's exact, but it's an experiment to be seen in the future. So high velocity just like low temperature will have an effect on your atoms. If you were traveling the speed of light to reach another solar system for exploration, the effects would slow aging, but cryogenics would be even better to have on the ship to simply 100% stop it.

Alright, so that begs the question, how did I get entangled with a known forum troll like EvilEmoX when I see that I don't really disagree much with Hawking based on what I linked above ?? EmoX misused Hawking, withheld a correction allowing me to think Hawking supported backwards time travel, he spoke of "time travel" with claims HE believes in like, "Time goes forwards, slows down, stops, and even goes backwards.", and this, "I am willing to bet time exists as a long string of events that can be traveled within." He pulled out things from Star Trek like "gravity drives" and the "multi-earths, evil twin" plots from many SciFi movies which explains why he hangs on to my use of cryogenics from a Stallone one to cover for his embarrassing references...

I stand corrected, EmoX is the hack here!

I ignore equations from the greatest minds in history because f*ck you that's why!!!

I was aware of the time dilation concept and I quoted it again to show I mentioned it. You claiming I ignored it, make it plural, and making "minds" plural renders you a lying liar.

I ignore Einstein's equation for closed time loops created with immense gravity because Einstein is a hack.

Straw man. Never said anything negative of Einstein. Again, makes you a lying liar.

Never said anything about such and such equation, I don't even know it, so how could I ?

Ah, but wait, the fun doesn't stop there!

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/time-travel-simulation-resolves-grandfather-paradox/

This would create a "closed timelike curve," or CTC, a loop that could be traversed to travel back in time. Hawking and many other physicists find CTCs abhorrent, because any macroscopic object traveling through one would inevitably create paradoxes where cause and effect break down.

Your boy Hawking rejects the "closed timelike curve/loop" concept! Hawking dares to disagree with Einstein ??? WHAT ?!?!??! So based on your logic, you imply that he who disagrees with Einstein is a hack. Hawking disagrees with Einstein, therefore by implication, he is a hack.

Congratulations, so you think Hawking is a hack and this after I retracted my characterization of him as one ? Hah!

Check. Mate. Spaceman. Yes, I am still laughing at the joke that is you!

I think hawking is a hack because math sucks!

No, it's you that's a dishonest hack, and many other things! You name-dropped him, you used him, you put your own "bet" down about being able to travel backwards in time, etc. so I figured he supported it also (and you avoided correcting me when I stated that assumption outloud either due to dishonesty or ignorance!) which he clearly states is impossible and I agree! So calling him a hack is something I have to retract for making the mistake of debating a troll like you.

Regardless, one favorite scientist of yours is not the end-all-be-all and all other scientists that have differing or opposing viewpoints are to be discarded. I get that he's respected, but let's not make him infallible either! After all, he and Einstein don't always see eye-to-eye, do they ? Eh, chief ??

I ignore the fact that time slows down even though it has been proven.  I also ignore the fact that time stops at relativistic speeds or at a singularity.

You're a liar. I clearly mentioned the concept of time dilation earlier, the effect on clocks, the idea of traveling fast, 20 less breaths per minute versus if you were on earth, slower cellular processes, etc. the idea of aging less, etc.

The fact that you're not reading my posts is a problem with you, not me! And in fact, I can prove that you haven't with one of your supposed gotchas:

The universe, as we see it, is an infinite space with particles/atoms that build suns, planets, lifeforms, etc.

Another glaring omission on your part is whether the Universe is infinite or not?

You came back 4 days later only to claim I "omitted my view" that the universe is infinite (same as Hawking's) and referred to said omission as "glaring." Your failure to read is what's glaring! If I'm gonna bother to read everything in your posts, at least bother to read mine before smarting off - if not, f--k off!

I don't understand that time is a dimension

Last time you stated it as your view, not it's just fact ? We'll agree to disagree - The definitions of time, their misuse is what I believe leads to confusion. Pretty sure not all scientists see that the same way either, so don't try to act like you have consensus there!

I know for a fact that the universe is infinite yet somehow it's expanding faster than the speed of light so I ignore my own contradictions.

Your boy Stephen Hawking also agrees the universe is infinite, and I'm pretty sure most scientists do as well. He's not a good enough source for you now ? You keep pimping his name around like he's the only physicist we should ever listen to! You seem to cast doubt by sarcastically adding "I know for a fact."

And "it" expanding ? An infinite space aspect is just infinite. Stuff expanding is stuff expanding... You're assigning some kind of boundary concept it seems to an infinite black space which if there was no matter in it, it'd still be an infinite black space. You have communication problems and that's a big reason why we're still arguing. If you're referring to all the solar systems being detected as moving outward from the big bang point, all the collective matter from our big bang, I mean, I'm somewhat familiar with that, but I don't see what point you're trying to make. You're going off on tangents in your "you don't know this/that" shtick. There can be no end to the universe which makes the most sense.

What exactly are my alleged contradictions as a result of my premise ? Back it up or STFU! You've gotten away with making many many claims and I've not forced you to fetch source quotes/links or explain further, but I think I might just have to on this one. You're already going by some false straw mans and at least one issue with Hawking was corrected.

Also, please stop wandering off into 100 different directions. I'm losing interest reading you...

I ignore the fact that there may be multiple universes.

Oh, that's a fact now but the infinity of the universe is questionable to you ? You have no evidence for speculative, alleged, arbitrary boundaries in our one infinite universe. Since it is your claim, you actually need to prove it instead of just stating it as fact. Regardless, I don't see how it is useful or interesting here.

What is this boundary that you allege that separates one verse from another ? Forget it, I mean, that's a nice tangent, but not really interested in exploring it with you. I never liked you on the forum to begin with.

It's funny, you like an arbitrary imaginative boundary concept, state it as fact, and above you question my certainty of the infinity of the universe all selectively like a little bitty baby! Awwww. "Support *my* concept and I'll support yours!" Hah!

I think a freezer is a time machine.

In a manner of speaking, and it's a feasible, possible concept (we can already freeze embryos for later use) which I clearly already explained to you - it accomplishes the same thing if a human body is traveling at the speed of light and it biologically ages less and less. Velocity is acting on the human body causing this and achieving preservation, while temperature, as in freezing a human body, acts on it and will cause 100% preservation - "time" as in the biological clock/atomic motion has 100% stopped for the body.

Moreover, if we hope to travel to other solar systems, we'll NEED this rather than just rely on the effect of time dilation, but yeah, both accomplish the same thing, while one is 100%. A spaceship trying to explore the universe can't have its human passengers wasting oxygen, pissing, crapping, eating away their food supply, you're gonna NEED to deep freeze them for the journey if it is to be succesful!

And guess what, nutjob ? I'll make YOU a bet: I bet you we'll figure out how to safely cryogenically freeze/unfreeze a human body WAY BEFORE we can ever build a spaceship that can safely travel at the speed of light or close to it! You'll need good AI computer technology by then as well, not just cryogenics, as no human will be able to make the split-second decisions to avoid collisions to asteroids at high speeds, etc.!

But yeah, how does your brain NOT see any comparison or understanding ? So desperate you are for a contradiction ? With all that, even so, I wouldn't refer to that ship traveling as "time travel" - I would refer to it by what it actually IS, space travel! Yes, the humans onboard will age less than on earth, but that's a side effect (much like deep cryo sleep) and "time" is not a destination you can travel to per se! That is all space travel WITH the benefit of preservation, that is, biological aging slowed down (or stopped 100% with cryogenics) - that's it!

Again, are you denying that cryogenically freezing/unfreezing a human is a plausible, feasible concept in the near future because you saw it on Buck Rogers or Demolition Man ? You're the nut that believes in backwards time travel, but something that we're pretty close to achieving is too much of a stretch for you ?? And the comparison of atomic preservation being achieved given high velocity versus low temperature is *totally* lost on you ?? No, you're NOT that dumb, you're just a hackish troll!

I site sources from Stallone movies.

This attempts to falsely suggest I acted as if I pretended to cite a scientific news source in simply mentioning a plot device from a Stallone movie. You know full well what my intent was - I referred to Demolition Man and Buck Rogers, an old TV Show, as a helpful reference point for those that might remember the cryogenics concept. That doesn't make the concept absurdly fictional! We can freeze embryos now for later use! You keep repeating Stallone Stallone Stallone as if it discredits cryogenics/cryonics as a serious in-the-near-future scientific advancement yet you're a guy that believes in "multi-earth, evil twin" possibilities in the "100%" - how curious!

I get it though, you're angry, butthurt, and you're looking for whatever you can for ridicule but it's dishonest. The cryogenics concept is what was the point and what it can accomplish (have you wake up 200 years from now if that's what you pay for or deep space travel to conserve resources!) versus a speed-of-light traveling spaceship (Star Trek) which is a creation we won't see for centuries/millenniums, if ever! Just because I connected cryogenics/cryonics to a movie people might've seen here (in a F--KING MOVIE THREAD), doesn't discredit something that's actually feasible, plausible in-the-near-future versus that magical spaceship we need to send your ass off on your way one day to boldly go where NO emo has gone before!!! One way ticket for you EmoX, my treat!!!! ;)

P.S. Do check out Interstellar some time, it's right up your alley, tailored-made for nutters like you!

! Interstellar Movie - Official Trailer 3

[esteban]

JESUS TITTIES...

I made a thread for time travel. I wish everyone could go back in time and use it...

I exposed my kids to a movie from my childhood that I'd almost forgotten about and they LOVED it.

Anyone remember Solarbabies?

I enjoyed that movie even though I NEVER UNDERSTOOD HOW THEY COULD ROLLERSKATE ACROSS THE DESERT.

I am serious about enjoying the film.

Granted, I haven't watched it in decades.

Did it age better than Ice Pirates?

I think it might have. Maybe not. Indecisive. Hmmm...

[NightWolve]

Anyone remember Solarbabies?

YES! That chick from The Lost Boys was in it! And the dude that played Michael opposite Kiefer Sutherland was also in this!

FYI, the problem or dilemma that is faced for myself and others is we prefer to finish off a debate in place where the conclusion will be seen by all who observed it. He came back in here and smarted off more, the illiterate science space nerd that he is - therefore I preferred my response to go here as well. I think life really sucks here on earth for him which explains his obsession with reading/thinking/theorizing/fantasizing about what could be "out there" and the fantasy to - dare I say - boldly go where no emo has gone before...

[esteban]

To boldly go where no Evo has gone before...

[Galder]

Enemy of the state, my girlfriend saw the turbo express and said:"hey, that was like your gameboy thingy!" because i was looking elsewhere (lol) and then i realised it was a turbo express!!! Instantly i came here to post about it but -of course- you guys had already started related threads with every detail, hehe. Needless to say that any interest in the movie's plot was lost after that as i was trying to notice the whereabouts of the turbo again.

[EvilEvoIX]

Ted 2, fine movie if you are a fan of Seth's humor but obviously not as good as the first one.  Worth a watch for sure.


Not a Movie but Comedians in Cars Getting Coffe is a great series.  Very funny and natural.

[NightWolve]

Glad to see I'm not the only solarbaby in the community. And NW, I was pulling your chain. I'm a fan of Evo bashing at any time, in any thread.

I did go a bit excess in wanting to "stick it to him" and partly cause of his "Destroy Nulltard's DoxPhile ?? You can't destroy what's already a failure! Mwahahaha!" trolling of you. I look out for my homies once in a while. ;)

Last night I watched Jupiter Ascending. The only thing I remember about it is that Mila Kunis needs a good dicking.

The Wachowskis just don't have the mojo they used to since The Matrix... It's a pity! They should've just kept working only with producer Joel Silver - one of the best of the best!

Also watched Paul Blart 2.  Paul Blart does not need a dicking, but the Puerto Rican Sarah Silverman doppelganger does.

Yeah, that was 'meh' too. I liked the first one though!

[GreatBlue Swirlof99]

S.W.A.T, WWZ and Inside out (the movie about inside the kids head!)

[Psycho Punch]

I watched Cannibal Holocaust yesterday. Yep.

[esteban]

Enemy of the state, my girlfriend saw the turbo express and said:"hey, that was like your gameboy thingy!" because i was looking elsewhere (lol) and then i realised it was a turbo express!!! Instantly i came here to post about it but -of course- you guys had already started related threads with every detail, hehe. Needless to say that any interest in the movie's plot was lost after that as i was trying to notice the whereabouts of the turbo again.

TurboExpress.

I wish we had an interview with the propmaster to find out how the TE was chosen...they needed something that physical media could slip into (in place of a HuCARD).

[Galder]

Enemy of the state, my girlfriend saw the turbo express and said:"hey, that was like your gameboy thingy!" because i was looking elsewhere (lol) and then i realised it was a turbo express!!! Instantly i came here to post about it but -of course- you guys had already started related threads with every detail, hehe. Needless to say that any interest in the movie's plot was lost after that as i was trying to notice the whereabouts of the turbo again.

TurboExpress.

I wish we had an interview with the propmaster to find out how the TE was chosen...they needed something that physical media could slip into (in place of a HuCARD).

I think one of the reasons that it was chosen was the fact that the hucards looked really cool and 'technologically advanced'. Funny thing is that they still do, at least to me :]

[esteban]

I watched Cannibal Holocaust yesterday. Yep.

I hope you were naked at the time.

Eating lunch.

With your family.

When your gramma was visiting.

[EvilEvoIX]

Just saw Joe Dirt 2, could be the worst movie I have ever seen.  Obviously I wasn't expecting "On the Waterfront" or "Schindler's List", but this sequel makes the first Joe dirt like seem Oscar worthy.  Terrible Jokes, no such thing as a plot with gaping plot holes, FORCED comedy so obviously that even the actors can't deliver properly without rolling their eyes.  Terrible, terrible movie.  Worse than the 4.4 rating.

[seieienbu]

Just saw Antman. I thought it was okay, I guess.  The humor styling seemed very repetitive; the basic joke construction was something like:

Guy A:  At least it's not X.
Guy B:  It's totally X.

After about the third time that particular joke happened I'd stopped finding it funny, I guess.  Definitely not as good as, say, the first Avengers movie but it had some neat action sequences.

[HailingTheThings]

Just watched the first Guyver live action movie on Blu-ray. Everything looked pretty, the movie is still terrible, I love it. Yay!

[munchiaz]

I just watched Pulp Fiction with the Girlfriend. This is my first time watching the whole movie. I always just caught bits and pieces of it in the past. This movie is so damn quotable

[hoobs88]

Just saw Joe Dirt 2, could be the worst movie I have ever seen.  Obviously I wasn't expecting "On the Waterfront" or "Schindler's List", but this sequel makes the first Joe dirt like seem Oscar worthy.  Terrible Jokes, no such thing as a plot with gaping plot holes, FORCED comedy so obviously that even the actors can't deliver properly without rolling their eyes.  Terrible, terrible movie.  Worse than the 4.4 rating.

Was that a straight to DVD release? I don't recall seeing that playing in the theaters.

[EvilEvoIX]

Terrible movie.  Could be the worst I have ever seen.  I am still upset  Its a Happy Madison Production as well so at least it would be sub par, but just terrible.  Has to be seen to be believed.

[NightWolve]

hah, even worse... straight to Crackle, the free but ad-laden video streaming service.

Yeah, I learned about that a little while ago. Well, if it keeps me off PirateBay some and the movie industry gets paid with all those ads, s'all good, I still get to watch something and not feel guilty about resorting to pirating it. ;)

[sirhcman]

I watched Canadian Bacon over the weekend, not the biggest John Candy fan but the movie had some funny moments. A lot of the humor is definitely dated so the movie hasn't aged all that well. Michael Moore wrote it so expect his usual political agenda but in a more light-hearted way. Even still, a good 90 minute time waster to escape reality

[GreatBlue Swirlof99]

Jaws, Jaws 2 andJaws 3

[datbuta]

My girlfriend and I just watched Mr. Holmes. Its a drama about an aging Sherlock Holmes who is trying to solve a case that he believes is unsolved from his early years. Though he can't remember all the details because of his fading memory. Pretty good movie. No action... its just a drama movie with Ian McKellen playing the old Sherlock. Good story, good characters and actors. I could see Ian McKellen playing a younger Sherlock Holmes if they had done any in the early 90s.

[EvilEvoIX]

Terminator Genisys, WOW!!!  It's a deliberate attempt to destroy the Terminator series for a pay day.  Schwarzenegger doesn't need money THAT bad.  Holy shit forced story, humor, deliberate rip offs ad nauseum.  Terrible movie, forcibly destroys the cannon series.  I have no idea why this was made, make me so angry.

[NightWolve]

Eh, it wasn't that bad... Granted, I had high hopes from the trailer this time, but I was just sad that once again, nobody can bring back the magic from when it was in James Cameron's hands... I think it's somewhat better than the other shit sequels, but yeah, it's still another shit sequel...

"James Cameron Regains Terminator Rights in 2019"
http://www.slashfilm.com/james-cameron-regains-terminator-rights-in-2019/

I just look forward to when that happens now and hope HE takes an interest in doing another one next time...

[EvilEvoIX]

Eh, it wasn't that bad... Granted, I had high hopes from the trailer this time, but I was just sad that once again, nobody can bring back the magic from when it was in James Cameron's hands... I think it's somewhat better than the other shit sequels, but yeah, it's still another shit sequel...

"James Cameron Regains Terminator Rights in 2019"
http://www.slashfilm.com/james-cameron-regains-terminator-rights-in-2019/

I just look forward to when that happens now and hope HE takes an interest in doing another one next time...

It's amazing how much a Director can make a difference.  My only concern is Arnold being he star and being irreplaceable.  He'll be 70 by the time James takes hold.

[Otaking]

Just watched Mad Max Fury Road. Everyone's been raving about it, saying it's amazing. So I went in with high expectations.
I thought it was a pretty good film, not amazing, just pretty good.

[NightWolve]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/mad_max_fury_road/

It got a 98% rating on Rotten Tomatoes which is hard to believe, those critics are usually hard on action movies so that really surprised me. It's on my to-watch list when I get a chance.

[Dicer]

Just watched Cool World for shits and giggles, since I don't think I've seen it since it came out...

Basigner was hotter as a toon.

[SuperGrafx]

I watched the first 2 "Ip man" movies.
I hear there's a 3rd on the way.

[esteban]

Just watched Mad Max Fury Road. Everyone's been raving about it, saying it's amazing. So I went in with high expectations.
I thought it was a pretty good film, not amazing, just pretty good.

It was fun. It was not a complete insult to the series. Have there been many movies that pulled this off?

Sadly, no.

rottentomatoes.com/m/mad_max_fury_road

It got a 98% rating on Rotten Tomatoes which is hard to believe, those critics are usually hard on action movies so that really surprised me. It's on my to-watch list when I get a chance.

I am surprised by this, too.

Just watched Cool World for shits and giggles, since I don't think I've seen it since it came out...

Basigner was hotter as a toon.

One of the few movies where the entire audience openly mocked it. That rarely happened in 80's suburbia. Even though we were just kids, we would usually privately mock a film.

This film did not deserve such discretion.

Of course, we were upset we paid good money to see it.

The exact same response occurred with Harry and the Hendersons.

Those two movies—I still never went back to watch them. I'm actually curious. I want to. I usually am not like this.

Once I commit, I watch a movie to its end. Usually.

[DQ187]

I watched the first 2 "Ip man" movies.
I hear there's a 3rd on the way.

The Ip man movies were pretty good!  Also like the Ong Bak movies and The Raid movies!

Just watched for me would be Ex Machina which I watched last night. Pretty good, better than i thought it would be. Wasn't crazy about the end but it was sort of inevitable.

[Otaking]

Just watched for me would be Ex Machina which I watched last night. Pretty good, better than i thought it would be. Wasn't crazy about the end but it was sort of inevitable.

Yeah thought Ex Machina just missed the mark. Through the film it was intriguing and building well to a big finish and then dropped the ball right at the end. Wasn't a terrible film or anything, just had the potential to be so much more with a better ending.

[NightWolve]

The Ip man movies were pretty good!  Also like the Ong Bak movies and The Raid movies!

Just watched for me would be Ex Machina which I watched last night. Pretty good, better than i thought it would be. Wasn't crazy about the end but it was sort of inevitable.

Yeah, those Raid movies are something else, a new experience in martial arts movies! Basic premise: if you're not hyper quick as lightning, you're dead... The first one honestly blew me away and that doesn't happen very often - it really was a different martial arts movie than what I was used to. I love the 2nd one as well and while it lost a little steam, it's still pretty great!

[EvilEvoIX]

  This Movie is outstanding!!!!  I had no idea it existed until I saw it on demand and watched.  It's style is reminiscent of the traditional Horror Comedy's with practical special effects and reminds me very much of Re-Animator which could be the best film in this Genre.

The main protagonist stars James Lorinz who is very much the poor man's Andrew McCarthy.  All of the acting and actors are terrible.  Like they were literally ripped off the streets and told to read a cue card.  The story is in fact so bad that Writer/director Frank Henenlotter improvised the basic story at a pitch meeting. After getting the okay to make the picture, he then wrote the script for the movie.  An extreme example of putting the cart well before the horse.

Frankenhooker is an homage to writer Mary Shelley, the 'Frankenstein' films and the low budget gore movies of the 1960s and 1970s, the FX, make-up and prosthetics are deliberately clumsy.



The premise is simple, A medical student sets out to recreate his decapitated fiancée by building her a new body made of Manhattan street hookers.  It's a perfect Drive-In style move, great for fans of the genre and obviously a great party movie.  I fully endorse it wholeheartedly.

[dingsbums]

Yeah Frankenhooker is great. If you like that one you should check out Brain Damage / Elmer for
sure (if you have not seen it already  ) - I always thought this is Henenlotter's best movie.

[NightWolve]

Gotta give an enthusiastic thumbs up to "Mad Max: Road Fury!" It stars Charlize Theron and Tom Hardy as Mad Max. You might not realize it, but Tom Hardy also played the villain "Bane" in "The Dark Knight Rises (2012)," the final Batman movie in Christoper Nolan's rebooted and respectable trilogy.

rottentomatoes.com/m/mad_max_fury_road

You know if Rotten Tomatoes gives a friggin' action movie a 98%, chances are it's worth watching!!! That immediately got my attention about this one!

I am quite skeptical of movie critics - I take their opinion with careful review. I've gotten a sense they develop grudges at certain directors, producers and/or actors, and so they'll shit on something if said person was involved in the movie because of it... So there's a politics at work there. I also find that they're usually the hardest on the action movie genre where the theme is primarily shit blowing up and what not, so when I saw a 98% review score on there, I couldn't friggin' believe it... Did hell freeze over I thought ? So I knew this one was on my to-watch list for sure and it DOES indeed deliver!

What was really interesting to me also is that George Miller/Miliotis, the original director of all the Mad Max movies, actually got to direct this one too!!! I would not have expected the original guy from 1979 had something to do with this, and heck, he hit it out of the ballpark; it did well, and recovered its production budget by the US sales alone, $373,374,961 worldwide! And since it succeeded, he got the greenlight for another one, so good for him on that too!

See it! Now! The End.

[SuperGrafx]

Jack Ryan: Shadow Agent

Good god is Keira Knightley ghastly in this film.

[jeffhlewis]

Gotta give an enthusiastic thumbs up to "Mad Max: Road Fury!" It stars Charlize Theron and Tom Hardy as Mad Max. You might not realize it, but Tom Hardy also played the villain "Bane" in "The Dark Knight Rises (2012)," the final Batman movie in Christoper Nolan's rebooted and respectable trilogy.

rottentomatoes.com/m/mad_max_fury_road

You know if Rotten Tomatoes gives a friggin' action movie a 98%, chances are it's worth watching!!! That immediately got my attention about this one!

I am quite skeptical of movie critics - I take their opinion with careful review. I've gotten a sense they develop grudges at certain directors, producers and/or actors, and so they'll shit on something if said person was involved in the movie because of it... So there's a politics at work there. I also find that they're usually the hardest on the action movie genre where the theme is primarily shit blowing up and what not, so when I saw a 98% review score on there, I couldn't friggin' believe it... Did hell freeze over I thought ? So I knew this one was on my to-watch list for sure and it DOES indeed deliver!

What was really interesting to me also is that George Miller/Miliotis, the original director of all the Mad Max movies, actually got to direct this one too!!! I would not have expected the original guy from 1979 had something to do with this, and heck, he hit it out of the ballpark; it did well, and recovered its production budget by the US sales alone, $373,374,961 worldwide! And since it succeeded, he got the greenlight for another one, so good for him on that too!

See it! Now! The End.

I was thinking about this yesterday - Fury Road is hands down my #1 movie of the year...nothing else has even come close. Does anybody else think it has a legit shot at best picture at the oscars this year?

[Psycho Punch]

I bet Mad Max is ranking close to 100% with those idiotic 'professional' critics because of all that bullshit "the feminist movie that men HATE" buzz that was going on at the movie's debut. Let's rate this high, that will show them. Not that there's anything wrong with the movie's empowerment of women, in fact it is a great improvement that helps to avoid blandness and gives personality to the picture. Not to mention that empowers women (duh).

That said, it is a great movie and a highly anticipated one. It deserves that rating and it indeed delivers, Nightwolve. I'm also looking forward to the Mad Max game that's going to be released following up on the new movie.

[wildfruit]

Mortals, time travel exists on all planes. How I cannot say. TOP SECRET. However, I can tell you Ebert approved of mad max.
PROOF

[esteban]

Mortals, time travel exists on all planes. How I cannot say. TOP SECRET. However, I can tell you Ebert approved of mad max.
PROOF

Ebert Obeyed. At least, he should have. GO SISKEL!

 

[Galder]

Wait, was there a 'Mad Max' in that movie??? Cool atmosphere but -overall- far from my expectations. Tom Hardy not suitable for the role imo.

[NightWolve]

Gotta give an enthusiastic thumbs up to "Mad Max: Road Fury!" It stars Charlize Theron and Tom Hardy as Mad Max. You might not realize it, but Tom Hardy also played the villain "Bane" in "The Dark Knight Rises (2012)," the final Batman movie in Christoper Nolan's rebooted and respectable trilogy.

I was thinking about this yesterday - Fury Road is hands down my #1 movie of the year...nothing else has even come close. Does anybody else think it has a legit shot at best picture at the oscars this year?

I dunno, but seems others are hoping and thinking the same too.

vulture.com/2015/08/could-mad-max-fury-road-make-it-to-the-oscars.html

I bet Mad Max is ranking close to 100% with those idiotic 'professional' critics because of all that bullshit "the feminist movie that men HATE" buzz that was going on at the movie's debut. Let's rate this high, that will show them. Not that there's anything wrong with the movie's empowerment of women, in fact it is a great improvement that helps to avoid blandness and gives personality to the picture. Not to mention that empowers women (duh).

Ah, that's an interesting theory if that's what it was. I wouldn't doubt it! Because it somewhat changed the formula from all the prior movies where Mad Max was the central character/hero whereas this time the hero responsibilities were divided between him and Charlize Theron's girl-power character, it got massive extra brownie points from them.

Yeah, it's bizarre to me that some sort of "the-feminist-movie-that-men-HATE" buzz could've got started. There was nothing to hate here! It would be like hating Red Sonja opposite Arnold Schwarzenegger's character or something... That was a fine medieval action movie in similar vein to Conan the Barbarian, etc.  ACTUALLY, Arnold's character WAS supposed to be Conan like in the comics, but there was a licensing Rights issue!!

Wait, was there a 'Mad Max' in that movie??? Cool atmosphere but -overall- far from my expectations. Tom Hardy not suitable for the role imo.

Well, tastes are gonna vary. I thought he did great. It's also funny how they sort of worked in a jaw metal mask in the story right off the bat, perhaps as some sort of homage to Dark Knight Rises and his Bane character. If you're indicating you would've preferred someone with more charisma, I might agree there, but he did well enough in my book.

[Galder]

Yeah, on the other hand I liked the Bane character, and the accent hehe.

[turboswimbz]

I so want to see mad max, I hear nothing but good things . . . sad I missed this one.

[roflmao]

Mad Max is my favorite movie of this year.

So is Shaun the Sheep.  That movie is my favorite movie of the year too. 

No joke.

[shawnji]

I just saw The Martian this weekend, and it. was. FANTASTIC.

I realize it's essentially just Apollo 13 on Mars, but it's handled so well.  It's the kind of optimistic, hopeful vision for humanity that I've been missing at the movies for years.  Seriously, I came out of the theater absolutely beaming, and that hasn't happened since... it hasn't happened in a really long time.

It's now my second favorite Ridley Scott film, just trailing Blade Runner and right above Alien.  It's certainly his best movie since Gladiator.  I really want to go see it again... which, again, is another thing I haven't done in ages.

@roflmao  Shaun the Sheep really is excellent.  I adore all the Aardman films and tv shows.

[NightWolve]

It's now my second favorite Ridley Scott film, just trailing Blade Runner and right above Alien.  It's certainly his best movie since Gladiator.  I really want to go see it again... which, again, is another thing I haven't done in ages.

That's good to hear as I had lost respect for his movie-making ability. "Exodus: Gods and Kings" absolutely sucked ballz and I never should've bothered watching it. His "Robin Hood" was far from Gladiator, and I'd rather watch the previous one with Kevin Costner.

Prometheus on the other hand was interesting certainly, and respectable, I think mostly because of Michael Fassbender's performance, but it was lacking compared to say Alien. I actually think Guy Pearce's (as Peter Weyland) viral speech video (TED Talk) was better than the whole movie.

Anyway, yeah, it's good to hear if Martian is on the par with Gladiator (back when the Russell Crowe/Ridley Scott partnership was paying off). I'll check it out on video.