Also, about "The Host."
Friday, March 29, 2013
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
"The Wolverine" Trailer(s) Underwhelm
The "X-Men" franchise is in a weird place, being the only major modern comic franchise from the pre-"Avengers"/"Dark Knight" era (aka the "We Haven't Quite Figured This Out Yet" age) to still being kicking without a reboot/remake etc. The best one is still "First Class," and not uncoincidentally that's the one that was most free to jettison the late-90s baggage still attached to the series.
In any case, there are trailers now for "The Wolverine," Hugh Jackman's second chance at keeping the only character to date that anyone seems willing to buy tickets to see him play relevant in a solo series. Neither one is especially encouraging (not "bad," just rote and dull looking) but here's the international version, which is the less-crummy of the two...
This is, of course, based on the "Wolverine fighting Ninjas in Japan" business from the 80s, and it's kind of amusing seeing that quintessentially Reagan-era motif of seemingly-modern corporations in "exotic Japan" being hives of sinister intent swarming with Ninja intrigue and present-day Samurai unironically transposed to the present (this takes place after "X-Men: The Last Stand.")
Part of me wants to complain about Wolverine somehow having reverted back to wandering around with his Depression Beard after his supposed development into Responsible Leader Guy in "Last Stand." I imagine the handwave will be "he's mad about what happened to Jean Grey" (get in line, bub - I had to pay to watch that piece of shit) but whatever - Jackman needs to eat in between his more interesting movies that people don't go to see, and it doesn't look terrible, so... yeah.
In any case, there are trailers now for "The Wolverine," Hugh Jackman's second chance at keeping the only character to date that anyone seems willing to buy tickets to see him play relevant in a solo series. Neither one is especially encouraging (not "bad," just rote and dull looking) but here's the international version, which is the less-crummy of the two...
This is, of course, based on the "Wolverine fighting Ninjas in Japan" business from the 80s, and it's kind of amusing seeing that quintessentially Reagan-era motif of seemingly-modern corporations in "exotic Japan" being hives of sinister intent swarming with Ninja intrigue and present-day Samurai unironically transposed to the present (this takes place after "X-Men: The Last Stand.")
Part of me wants to complain about Wolverine somehow having reverted back to wandering around with his Depression Beard after his supposed development into Responsible Leader Guy in "Last Stand." I imagine the handwave will be "he's mad about what happened to Jean Grey" (get in line, bub - I had to pay to watch that piece of shit) but whatever - Jackman needs to eat in between his more interesting movies that people don't go to see, and it doesn't look terrible, so... yeah.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
The Book
If you were at Escapist Movie Night at PAXEast this past weekend (or you caught an earlier reveal during the Desert Bus charity event) you already know about this, but for everyone else it would seem the cat is out of the bag...
So! I'm writing a book. Or, rather, I've written a book and - barring any unforseen disaster - it will be coming out soon. It's a book about video games, and is being developed with (and will be sold exclusively online through) fangamer. If I had to describe it as anything it would be a book of game criticism; though not of a kind I've found anywhere else.
Further details (all of which are, it goes without saying, wholly subject to change) after the jump...
At this time the book itself doesn't have a title I can officially announce or cover-art, but the main text of the thing has been written. My "big idea" was to take the longform "scene-by-scene" (or shot-by-shot) analysis often applied to book-length criticism of movies or plays to gaming by, essentially, novelizing a "Let's Play."
The approach: I would play all the way through a classic game - every level, every enemy, every item, the whole experience - and analyze everything about it as I went: The mechanics, the layouts, the art-design of the sprites, the aesthetics of the backgrounds, the music, the known history of the production, cultural references and context, etc. In addition, since it's my position that the effect our moods outside of gaming effect the interactivity of the medium and vice-versa, the "narrative" of playing the game would be intercut with the "narrative" of what was going on in my life during the play-through.
I chose "Super Mario Bros. 3" to be the subject, mainly because it's my favorite game but also because it's the best possible candidate: A classic game, part of the most famous series in the entire medium, lengthy, linear and enduringly popular enough that a sizable portion of a prospective readership would be familiar with it. It ultimately took on a greater significance, though, as the initial play-through itself wound up coinciding with my preparations for moving out of the home I'd grown up in - in other words, playing this game in the house I'd first fallen in love with it for the last time.
So... yeah, this is "labor of love" stuff. But I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't proud of the idea that - to my knowledge, at least - this kind of in-depth analysis hasn't been done at this scale for a single game. For good measure, it also includes a history of the franchise and my own personal history with it.
At this time, all I can say about release dates is that we're angling to have it available within the next few months (my goal is to have some copies ready to sell in-person at SGC - fingers crossed) but I'll be updating here as more information re: dates, cost, title, etc is made ready for public reveal. I'm nervous but excited about the whole process... I just hope enough of you folks A.) give it a shot and B.) like what you find.
Stay tuned for more details.
So! I'm writing a book. Or, rather, I've written a book and - barring any unforseen disaster - it will be coming out soon. It's a book about video games, and is being developed with (and will be sold exclusively online through) fangamer. If I had to describe it as anything it would be a book of game criticism; though not of a kind I've found anywhere else.
Further details (all of which are, it goes without saying, wholly subject to change) after the jump...
At this time the book itself doesn't have a title I can officially announce or cover-art, but the main text of the thing has been written. My "big idea" was to take the longform "scene-by-scene" (or shot-by-shot) analysis often applied to book-length criticism of movies or plays to gaming by, essentially, novelizing a "Let's Play."
The approach: I would play all the way through a classic game - every level, every enemy, every item, the whole experience - and analyze everything about it as I went: The mechanics, the layouts, the art-design of the sprites, the aesthetics of the backgrounds, the music, the known history of the production, cultural references and context, etc. In addition, since it's my position that the effect our moods outside of gaming effect the interactivity of the medium and vice-versa, the "narrative" of playing the game would be intercut with the "narrative" of what was going on in my life during the play-through.
I chose "Super Mario Bros. 3" to be the subject, mainly because it's my favorite game but also because it's the best possible candidate: A classic game, part of the most famous series in the entire medium, lengthy, linear and enduringly popular enough that a sizable portion of a prospective readership would be familiar with it. It ultimately took on a greater significance, though, as the initial play-through itself wound up coinciding with my preparations for moving out of the home I'd grown up in - in other words, playing this game in the house I'd first fallen in love with it for the last time.
So... yeah, this is "labor of love" stuff. But I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't proud of the idea that - to my knowledge, at least - this kind of in-depth analysis hasn't been done at this scale for a single game. For good measure, it also includes a history of the franchise and my own personal history with it.
At this time, all I can say about release dates is that we're angling to have it available within the next few months (my goal is to have some copies ready to sell in-person at SGC - fingers crossed) but I'll be updating here as more information re: dates, cost, title, etc is made ready for public reveal. I'm nervous but excited about the whole process... I just hope enough of you folks A.) give it a shot and B.) like what you find.
Stay tuned for more details.
Monday, March 25, 2013
These Are Your New Ninja Turtles
Deadline is reporting that all four roles have now been cast for the Michael Bay-produced, Jonathan Liebesman-directed "TMNT" movie; which is once again moving ahead with no word on what they've done about the terrible screenplay that helped scuttled the project earlier. The four will join Megan Fox as April O'Neil, and apparently the notion that the turtles will be realized through motion-capture CGI is supposed to be news - I thought that was just assumed from the very beginning...
LEONARDO: Pete Ploszek; a virtual unknown fresh out of USC, only prior credits are TV guest spots.
DONATELLO: Jeremy Howard; onetime child-actor turned recurring TV mainstay. Has kind of a DJ Qualls thing going on, that plus the motion-capture leads me to believe we'll be looking at the turtles being somehow "matched" to their actors design-wise (re: Donatello leaning heavy on the geek/nerd angle) rather than being near-identical save for their masks and weapons. Not sure if that sounds like a good idea or not - part of me feels like the guys being differentiated primarily on personality is why they were strong(ish) characters...
MICHAELANGELO: Noel Fisher; who played the blonde high-camp Romanian vampire "Vladimir" in the final "Twilight" movie (he's the "Dat didn't taaake maach!" guy in this clip.)
RAPHAEL: Alan Ritchson; fashion model turned actor, best known as the "Smallville" version of Aquaman.
I assume we'll find out whether Liam Neeson or Morgan Freeman won the knife-fight over who gets to collect the quick paycheck for voicing Master Splinter (I have no idea if that actually happened, you just kind of have to assume they were among the first guys offered the part at this point.)
Beyond that, the rest of the casting should tell us how much (if anything) of the infamous earlier screenplay has survived: Casey Jones was a teenager in that version (and the lead role, think Sam Witwicky again,) Bebop, Rocksteady and Krang all featured and Shredder was an American paramilitary leader named Col. Schrader; so hearing the word "Shredder" or the casting of a Japanese actor would be indicators of substantial change (as would an adult or non-present Casey Jones). Would like to see B&R (and Krang) survive, though - pic will probably still be shit, but getting to check seeing those two in live-action off the "always wanted to see" list would be a solid consolation prize.
LEONARDO: Pete Ploszek; a virtual unknown fresh out of USC, only prior credits are TV guest spots.
DONATELLO: Jeremy Howard; onetime child-actor turned recurring TV mainstay. Has kind of a DJ Qualls thing going on, that plus the motion-capture leads me to believe we'll be looking at the turtles being somehow "matched" to their actors design-wise (re: Donatello leaning heavy on the geek/nerd angle) rather than being near-identical save for their masks and weapons. Not sure if that sounds like a good idea or not - part of me feels like the guys being differentiated primarily on personality is why they were strong(ish) characters...
MICHAELANGELO: Noel Fisher; who played the blonde high-camp Romanian vampire "Vladimir" in the final "Twilight" movie (he's the "Dat didn't taaake maach!" guy in this clip.)
RAPHAEL: Alan Ritchson; fashion model turned actor, best known as the "Smallville" version of Aquaman.
I assume we'll find out whether Liam Neeson or Morgan Freeman won the knife-fight over who gets to collect the quick paycheck for voicing Master Splinter (I have no idea if that actually happened, you just kind of have to assume they were among the first guys offered the part at this point.)
Beyond that, the rest of the casting should tell us how much (if anything) of the infamous earlier screenplay has survived: Casey Jones was a teenager in that version (and the lead role, think Sam Witwicky again,) Bebop, Rocksteady and Krang all featured and Shredder was an American paramilitary leader named Col. Schrader; so hearing the word "Shredder" or the casting of a Japanese actor would be indicators of substantial change (as would an adult or non-present Casey Jones). Would like to see B&R (and Krang) survive, though - pic will probably still be shit, but getting to check seeing those two in live-action off the "always wanted to see" list would be a solid consolation prize.
Saturday, March 23, 2013
PAXEast Special: "The Big Picture of Boston"
Why We Can't Have Nice Things
A quick object lesson in the way that language can be abused.
Hollywood studio chief says, effectively, "let's maybe think about not being jerks."
Jerks respond by calling her a bigot and censor.
Nowhere in Pascal's (admittedly, let's face it, pie in the sky "nice idea") suggestion as to how the pro-equality fellow execs in her audience could use their positions to help the cause was there a call for censorship, or a rule, or even some kind of official position. It's a simple call for studio bosses with their fingers on the greenlight button to incorporate "being less homophobic" into the shaping of screenplays under their production - which is already their job!
Taking a pencil/red-marker etc to screenplays is what they do, and usually for much more cynical/financial reasons - "let's use that power for good" should not be a controversial request. But because it can be made to look like "liberal hypocrisy" in a meant-to-be-skimmed (you've got to read close to find the qualifying "not in so many words" in Nolte's screed) blurb on a site built on confirmation-bias and ginned-up non-issue outrage.
Hollywood studio chief says, effectively, "let's maybe think about not being jerks."
Jerks respond by calling her a bigot and censor.
Nowhere in Pascal's (admittedly, let's face it, pie in the sky "nice idea") suggestion as to how the pro-equality fellow execs in her audience could use their positions to help the cause was there a call for censorship, or a rule, or even some kind of official position. It's a simple call for studio bosses with their fingers on the greenlight button to incorporate "being less homophobic" into the shaping of screenplays under their production - which is already their job!
Taking a pencil/red-marker etc to screenplays is what they do, and usually for much more cynical/financial reasons - "let's use that power for good" should not be a controversial request. But because it can be made to look like "liberal hypocrisy" in a meant-to-be-skimmed (you've got to read close to find the qualifying "not in so many words" in Nolte's screed) blurb on a site built on confirmation-bias and ginned-up non-issue outrage.
Friday, March 22, 2013
Escape to The Movies: "Spring Breakers"
It's a goddamn masterpiece, the first genuine must-see of 2013 and may be Harmony Korine's first truly great movie. No, really - there's no joke there. Go see this. Now.
"Intermission" talks caveman movies, because of "The Croods" (which is actually pretty good.)
Oh, and come see ME at PAXEast! I'll be around the con all weekend, and at the Escapist Movie Night panel at 9:00pm on Saturday in the Merman Theater!
"Intermission" talks caveman movies, because of "The Croods" (which is actually pretty good.)
Oh, and come see ME at PAXEast! I'll be around the con all weekend, and at the Escapist Movie Night panel at 9:00pm on Saturday in the Merman Theater!
Thursday, March 21, 2013
Still Not Feeling It
There's a new international trailer for "Star Trek Into Dark Knight" that includes some new footage, most notably/curiously a seemingly gratuitous glimpse of Alice Eve in her underwear that seemingly exists just for the benefit of screencaps. Turns out, it's JJ "Mystery Box" Abrams playing more advertising games with us, as there's actually a hidden URL in the background of the scene that leads to... a new poster.
Okay, so... I'm pretty-much okay with being "the guy" who still not really onboard with Abrams in general and his version of "Trek" specifically; so I get that anything remotely critical I have to say will be summarily dismissed. Fine. If I couldn't put up with that, I wouldn't be in the business. The trailer is pretty good, though I'm not any more persuaded that the problems of the previous installment won't simply be exacerbated.
Also, I understand that this is some kind of sacrilege because... well, because he's "Sherlock," pretty-much... at this point I've got to say it: If not for Cumberbatch's reigning-BBC-pinup-dude status and the obligatory Abrams obfuscation the "mystery villain" here would seem spectacularly boring: Yet another lone chaos-bringer ranting about how unstable everything actually is and how he can't wait to show us and blah blah...
I know, I know, "it's not my father's Star Trek," and I'm sure whatever he ultimately turns out to be will be interesting on some level... but taken at face value it's hard to ignore that we're being asked to pysch ourselves up for The Enterprise Crew's epic showdown with... Angry Man In Black Trenchcoat. Doesn't exactly inspire awe and wonder, is what I'm driving at...
Okay, so... I'm pretty-much okay with being "the guy" who still not really onboard with Abrams in general and his version of "Trek" specifically; so I get that anything remotely critical I have to say will be summarily dismissed. Fine. If I couldn't put up with that, I wouldn't be in the business. The trailer is pretty good, though I'm not any more persuaded that the problems of the previous installment won't simply be exacerbated.
Also, I understand that this is some kind of sacrilege because... well, because he's "Sherlock," pretty-much... at this point I've got to say it: If not for Cumberbatch's reigning-BBC-pinup-dude status and the obligatory Abrams obfuscation the "mystery villain" here would seem spectacularly boring: Yet another lone chaos-bringer ranting about how unstable everything actually is and how he can't wait to show us and blah blah...
I know, I know, "it's not my father's Star Trek," and I'm sure whatever he ultimately turns out to be will be interesting on some level... but taken at face value it's hard to ignore that we're being asked to pysch ourselves up for The Enterprise Crew's epic showdown with... Angry Man In Black Trenchcoat. Doesn't exactly inspire awe and wonder, is what I'm driving at...
That having been said... my takeaway from this poster is that - moreso than any before it - if you take away the title down the bottom it would be almost impossible to discern that this is supposed to be the poster for a "Star Trek" movie. Is that a problem? Is that a bad thing? I don't know. It feels like it SHOULD be, but I don't know. Thoughts?
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
X-Men Wedding Shocker!!!
Yeah, I know the accompanying image doesn't precisely fit. Cut me some slack, it's the only searchable-image for "X-Men Wedding" that doesn't seem like a lame tie-in to the corny gay joke every other outlet ran with.Anyway, in what might be the niftiest piece of tangentially-nerdy news of the year so far, Patrick Stewart is marrying New York jazz musician Sunny Ozell. And, since the wedding is set to be held in Massachusetts, they'll be taking advantage of the state's one day marriage-designation law (which allows a friend/relative of a couple to be temporarily empowered to legally perform their wedding) the ceremony will be officiated by Sir Ian McKellan; whom Stewart is set to once again be co-starring with (as Professor X and Magneto, respectively) in the upcoming "X-Men: Days of Future Past."
So... that's pretty cool. Congratulations to all involved.
Monday, March 18, 2013
Inevitable Mash-Up
Via CBM
"The Avengers" - "Power Rangers"-style. Pretty impressive, and kind of amazing that it took this long for someone to do it. I especially like that the editor thought to include Saban's weirdly out-of-place typeface for the credits...
"The Avengers" - "Power Rangers"-style. Pretty impressive, and kind of amazing that it took this long for someone to do it. I especially like that the editor thought to include Saban's weirdly out-of-place typeface for the credits...
Sunday, March 17, 2013
Disgraceful
(Trigger Warning for discussion of the Steubenville Trial)
I still hear many people who get confused at what people are talking about when they say "rape culture." I can understand that - it should be commonly understood, but since the subject is so profoundly uncomfortable you don't really get exposed to the specifics of unless your "involved" with it either on the activist or academic side.
In simple terms, it's an umbrella term meant to encapsulate all of the myriad justifications, excuses and defenses that are used to normalize and minimize rape and sexual-assault in the culture; including but not limited to:
"The Good Old Days Justification," aka "If something wasn't thought of as rape back in my father's/grandfather's day, it can't be rape now."
"She Asked For It," aka "How can she have actually meant NO when she's showing so much skin in a 'hookup' bar/club/party on a weekend?"
"The Scemantic Obfuscation," aka "Rape is something done by a masked attacker in a dark alley, other things like date-rape, marital rape, false-consent via misleading or intoxication, etc. are really just mistakes/misunderstandings and that people just 'call' rape now." (Bonus points if you can connect these supposed "over-reactions" to a cultural-conspiracy by "feminists" to lessen the negate the societal power of males.)
"Why Are We Even Talking About This?," aka "Rape or whatever you wanna call it (see #1 and #2) isn't really always that big of a deal, so people should get over it."
In any case, this and more was on full and spectacular display today as CNN reported on the guilty verdict and maximum (though still shamefully small, given that they were tried as juveniles) sentencing of the accused rapists in the so-called "Steubenville Trial." The reporting on this whole thing has been embarrassing from day one, though sadly unsurprising for much of the U.S. media - that mainstream American culture (outside of a few pockets of forward-thinking here and there) places such preposterously high value on the "promise" and "futures" of young men in High School/College athletics programs while placing such low value on the sexual autonomy and safety of young women isn't a surprise at this point.
But still, even as bad as most outlets are the national media is at least supposed to be better in these cases - since by their nature they're supposed to be "above" the narrow concerns of local news (or, for example, sports/entertainment news) and able to put things in a big picture context. This is especially expected of CNN, which likes to fancy itself the "grownup" of cable news compared to Fox's sputtering Alex P. Keaton and MSNBC's Wellsely Student Government After-Party... and yet today there was Poppy Harlow etc., reporting on the story not in terms of two dipshits getting maybe a sliver of what they deserve (or even simply "justice being served") but rather in terms of how sad it is that twopromising athletes with their whole lives ahead of them rapists have to *gasp!* do some jail time and register as sex offenders - tragically ending their bright potential careers likelihood of ever being paid obscene sums of money to play an ultimately meaningless game of ball-passing.
Yeah. My heart. It just aches...
So, then... people need to start getting shitcanned at CNN, right? I know that, since it's CNN nobody is generally watching to begin with, but still - this has to get somebody in trouble, doesn't it? It should be Somebody's job to watch out for shit like this?
I still hear many people who get confused at what people are talking about when they say "rape culture." I can understand that - it should be commonly understood, but since the subject is so profoundly uncomfortable you don't really get exposed to the specifics of unless your "involved" with it either on the activist or academic side.
In simple terms, it's an umbrella term meant to encapsulate all of the myriad justifications, excuses and defenses that are used to normalize and minimize rape and sexual-assault in the culture; including but not limited to:
"The Good Old Days Justification," aka "If something wasn't thought of as rape back in my father's/grandfather's day, it can't be rape now."
"She Asked For It," aka "How can she have actually meant NO when she's showing so much skin in a 'hookup' bar/club/party on a weekend?"
"The Scemantic Obfuscation," aka "Rape is something done by a masked attacker in a dark alley, other things like date-rape, marital rape, false-consent via misleading or intoxication, etc. are really just mistakes/misunderstandings and that people just 'call' rape now." (Bonus points if you can connect these supposed "over-reactions" to a cultural-conspiracy by "feminists" to lessen the negate the societal power of males.)
"Why Are We Even Talking About This?," aka "Rape or whatever you wanna call it (see #1 and #2) isn't really always that big of a deal, so people should get over it."
In any case, this and more was on full and spectacular display today as CNN reported on the guilty verdict and maximum (though still shamefully small, given that they were tried as juveniles) sentencing of the accused rapists in the so-called "Steubenville Trial." The reporting on this whole thing has been embarrassing from day one, though sadly unsurprising for much of the U.S. media - that mainstream American culture (outside of a few pockets of forward-thinking here and there) places such preposterously high value on the "promise" and "futures" of young men in High School/College athletics programs while placing such low value on the sexual autonomy and safety of young women isn't a surprise at this point.
But still, even as bad as most outlets are the national media is at least supposed to be better in these cases - since by their nature they're supposed to be "above" the narrow concerns of local news (or, for example, sports/entertainment news) and able to put things in a big picture context. This is especially expected of CNN, which likes to fancy itself the "grownup" of cable news compared to Fox's sputtering Alex P. Keaton and MSNBC's Wellsely Student Government After-Party... and yet today there was Poppy Harlow etc., reporting on the story not in terms of two dipshits getting maybe a sliver of what they deserve (or even simply "justice being served") but rather in terms of how sad it is that two
Yeah. My heart. It just aches...
So, then... people need to start getting shitcanned at CNN, right? I know that, since it's CNN nobody is generally watching to begin with, but still - this has to get somebody in trouble, doesn't it? It should be Somebody's job to watch out for shit like this?
Friday, March 15, 2013
Go Team Venture!
"The Venture Bros." is my favorite thing on television, period. It's been fascinating to watch it morph from a straight-on "Johnny Quest" parody to a broader riff on 70s/80s comics/cartoons/etc and now to a thing so densely-woven that it has a full-blown mythos of it's own to play with. Characters who started out as one-joke goofs on established icons are now wholly icons in their own right - it now feels both limiting and incredibly inaccurate to describe Hank & Dean in terms of Johnny or The Hardy Boys, or Brock as simply "psychopath Race Bannon," or even Dr. Orpheus as the flawless "Doctor Strange" send-up he still obviously is. Hell, Gary (aka Henchman 21) going from literally a meaningless bit-player to main character whose spectacular arc-derailment (right down to the way it instantly reminded us that The Monarch and Dr. Mrs. The Monarch are in fact still The Bad Guys) was the great sleight-of-hand masterstroke of Season 4 is practically a metaphor for the entire series.
Anyway, there's a new extended teaser for the finally-incoming Season 5, and it looks like the awesome plans to continue. There's a lot of quick flashes of things fans have more-or-less been expecting to see (Gary in a S.P.H.I.N.X. uniform? Check. More of "Goth Dean?" Check.) but also a lot of exciting "what does THAT mean!?" as well. Check it out:
Anyway, there's a new extended teaser for the finally-incoming Season 5, and it looks like the awesome plans to continue. There's a lot of quick flashes of things fans have more-or-less been expecting to see (Gary in a S.P.H.I.N.X. uniform? Check. More of "Goth Dean?" Check.) but also a lot of exciting "what does THAT mean!?" as well. Check it out:
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
"KICK-ASS 2." Oh yeah.
The first "Kick-Ass" is a movie that grows in quality every time I see it (which, by the way, is the EXACT opposite effect the original comic had) a rare and near-perfect mix of hard-R satire and genuinely sincere coming-of-age comedy. This now-trailered sequel? I'm onboard. Here's hoping the "great movie based on intermittently mediocre and mean-spirited book" streak continues...
Main thoughts: Holy CRAP! Jim Carrey showed up to work as "Col. Stars N' Stripes!" Whole thing seems to be striking the original's flawless balance between "these people are idiots!" and "this is awesome!" Gotta love a movie whose main antagonist's name can't be said in the ad-copy (outside of this reb-band trailer.)
Main thoughts: Holy CRAP! Jim Carrey showed up to work as "Col. Stars N' Stripes!" Whole thing seems to be striking the original's flawless balance between "these people are idiots!" and "this is awesome!" Gotta love a movie whose main antagonist's name can't be said in the ad-copy (outside of this reb-band trailer.)
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Big Picture: "Trolling the 90s"
OverBytes Does "Tropes vs. Women"
Now available for viewing by all, an overall appraisal on the first episode of "Tropes vs. Women in Video Games" and it's attendant controversies.
P.S. People who continue to insist on harping about production costs are directed to THIS post.
P.S. People who continue to insist on harping about production costs are directed to THIS post.
Monday, March 11, 2013
"Zero" Interest
Everything wrong with the American comics industry in a nutshell: Scott Snyder will spend A YEAR'S WORTH of books re-telling Batman's origin. Again.
I'm assuming they'll be either shooting these to Mars, translating them into Dolphin, air-dropping them into unexplored, "hypothetically" human-populated regions of the Amazon Rainforest or whatever other unlikely circumstances you might find someone who is unaware of Batman's origin-story.
Friday, March 8, 2013
Escape to The Movies: "Oz The Great & Powerful"
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Tropes vs Women launches first episode (UPDATED!)
Oh hey, remember that kickstarted webseries that people freaked out about because a woman was talking out of turn about man things, then decided it was actually a "scam" that would never actually come out when that didn't convince people that she was the antichrist?
Well, it came out. Here's a link. I'll chime back in later with what I actually thought of it.
UPDATE: At the suggestion of user "Nixou," I'm re-posting (with corrections) my response to one of the more consistent issues people seem to have re: the cost of producing a show like this (aka "how does THIS cost $150,000??) as follows:
Here's the thing: I (and I'm speaking strictly of my self-produced/funded stuff like TGO and American Bob here, not the Escapist gigs) and others working on the YouTube/Blip series side of this medium are generally A.) Making this stuff FOR the amateur/indie circuit and B.) using primarily materials we already have or can be "donated" either by ourselves or aquaintances. In my specific case, I'm not outputting OR shooting in HD, the shows themselves are not of "broadcast caliber" and I don't pay professional wages to the people who help out. If I did, the INCREDIBLY low-ball $6,000 pricetag she originally set (don't forget: the donations were so HUGE because people kept donating as a "screw you" to her detractors) would MAYBE cover 2 - 3 average-scale TGO episodes, tops.
I've noticed that people in general have a skewed view of what independent video/film production actually costs because a lot of guys on the indie/fanfilm scene (no, I won't be naming names) like to brag about how low their production budget is - the problem being that A LOT of the time these are guys who have "day jobs" in the professional film/video business and thus access to equipment and facilities that they would otherwise be paying substantial sums to rent or lease; or they don't include what they would normally charge a client for their services in their own productions, OR they have friends in similar circumstances who are "donating" their time/services and not listing what that would cost on a real job. For example: If "Game OverThinker" had the EXACT same schedule and final-quality but I was paying real industry-standard fees and wages for locations, facilities and crew; $10,000 would be a low-ball estimate for every episode.
Having watched the video itself: She's shooting and outputting in HD/broadcast-quality (this has clearly been designed for classroom/seminar presentation moreso than the web video) and most the MASSIVE amount of game footage looks to have been captured from either original sources (I'm assuming MAME or download-service copies for the retro stuff) - which requires both expensive equipment and the expense of the systems and games themselves. Also, I don't know if she does her own graphics and animation, but her transitions all look like original work; and even if she did do them herself the "going rate" for that kind of work can get pretty damn high especially if you plan to buy or license it in perpuity.
ALSO: I don't know what else she does for a regular living, but I DO know the relative man-hours of putting a project like this together and they are substantial - thusly, if the ONLY thing all the Kickstarter money did was pay her bills and living-expenses (via supplmental income) while she cut down on her regular paying work so that she could free up the time to actually play/record the games, write the script and make the video I'm frankly perplexed that she ever somehow thought a paltry sum like $6,000 was going to cover it. She's currently operating out of San Fransisco, one of the most expensive places to live - even modestly - in the United States; so when you factor all that in... trust me, the expenses for this kind of production are much more substantial than most would imagine.
Well, it came out. Here's a link. I'll chime back in later with what I actually thought of it.
UPDATE: At the suggestion of user "Nixou," I'm re-posting (with corrections) my response to one of the more consistent issues people seem to have re: the cost of producing a show like this (aka "how does THIS cost $150,000??) as follows:
Here's the thing: I (and I'm speaking strictly of my self-produced/funded stuff like TGO and American Bob here, not the Escapist gigs) and others working on the YouTube/Blip series side of this medium are generally A.) Making this stuff FOR the amateur/indie circuit and B.) using primarily materials we already have or can be "donated" either by ourselves or aquaintances. In my specific case, I'm not outputting OR shooting in HD, the shows themselves are not of "broadcast caliber" and I don't pay professional wages to the people who help out. If I did, the INCREDIBLY low-ball $6,000 pricetag she originally set (don't forget: the donations were so HUGE because people kept donating as a "screw you" to her detractors) would MAYBE cover 2 - 3 average-scale TGO episodes, tops.
I've noticed that people in general have a skewed view of what independent video/film production actually costs because a lot of guys on the indie/fanfilm scene (no, I won't be naming names) like to brag about how low their production budget is - the problem being that A LOT of the time these are guys who have "day jobs" in the professional film/video business and thus access to equipment and facilities that they would otherwise be paying substantial sums to rent or lease; or they don't include what they would normally charge a client for their services in their own productions, OR they have friends in similar circumstances who are "donating" their time/services and not listing what that would cost on a real job. For example: If "Game OverThinker" had the EXACT same schedule and final-quality but I was paying real industry-standard fees and wages for locations, facilities and crew; $10,000 would be a low-ball estimate for every episode.
Having watched the video itself: She's shooting and outputting in HD/broadcast-quality (this has clearly been designed for classroom/seminar presentation moreso than the web video) and most the MASSIVE amount of game footage looks to have been captured from either original sources (I'm assuming MAME or download-service copies for the retro stuff) - which requires both expensive equipment and the expense of the systems and games themselves. Also, I don't know if she does her own graphics and animation, but her transitions all look like original work; and even if she did do them herself the "going rate" for that kind of work can get pretty damn high especially if you plan to buy or license it in perpuity.
ALSO: I don't know what else she does for a regular living, but I DO know the relative man-hours of putting a project like this together and they are substantial - thusly, if the ONLY thing all the Kickstarter money did was pay her bills and living-expenses (via supplmental income) while she cut down on her regular paying work so that she could free up the time to actually play/record the games, write the script and make the video I'm frankly perplexed that she ever somehow thought a paltry sum like $6,000 was going to cover it. She's currently operating out of San Fransisco, one of the most expensive places to live - even modestly - in the United States; so when you factor all that in... trust me, the expenses for this kind of production are much more substantial than most would imagine.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
NEW "Iron Man 3" Trailer
...looks about as good as the last one, which is to say pretty damn good.
Not much "new" on display, but at least better looks at stuff that only flew by quickly in the previous trailer. Of particular note, though: "The Mandarin" does, indeed, seem to be called simply "The Mandarin" - which means that the proud Marvel Studios tradition of straight-up lying about this stuff is alive and well. I'm liking that they seem to be doubling-down on the "Ten Rings" as Al Qaeda angle from the first movie, with Mandarin looking more and more like a slightly more theatrical, pan-Asian Bin Laden with each new
If I had to guess, I'd imagine the "Iron Army" bit at the end involves remotely-operated "empty" suits; which sounds both like a fun idea and an interesting workaround to the issue of "will people be satisfied with 'only' Iron Man after seeing him with The Avengers?" The big lumpy one at the very end is, obviously, supposed to make you think of The Hulk - but I can't tell if it's supposed to be specifically the "Hulkbuster" armor from the comics - which everyone wants to see at some point. (Sidebar: Given that War Machine is already wearing Captain America/Iron Patriot colors, it'd be a fun detail if some or all of these other suits are specifically designed to be "supplemental Avengers.")
Also: The shot of Pepper Potts in some kind of harness (and is that her in the sports-bra at 2:01?) returns, though this time it looks like she's actually in the same aparatus we see Guy Pierce's character strapping a bunch of burly henchmen into elsewhere. "Extremis," the storyline this is partially based on, involved turning people into bio-weapons, so take from that what you will.
ALSO: Yes, I've heard all the same gossip about the ending as everybody else has. I dunno whether to buy it or not, but I'm not seeing many indicators of it here.
Not much "new" on display, but at least better looks at stuff that only flew by quickly in the previous trailer. Of particular note, though: "The Mandarin" does, indeed, seem to be called simply "The Mandarin" - which means that the proud Marvel Studios tradition of straight-up lying about this stuff is alive and well. I'm liking that they seem to be doubling-down on the "Ten Rings" as Al Qaeda angle from the first movie, with Mandarin looking more and more like a slightly more theatrical, pan-Asian Bin Laden with each new
If I had to guess, I'd imagine the "Iron Army" bit at the end involves remotely-operated "empty" suits; which sounds both like a fun idea and an interesting workaround to the issue of "will people be satisfied with 'only' Iron Man after seeing him with The Avengers?" The big lumpy one at the very end is, obviously, supposed to make you think of The Hulk - but I can't tell if it's supposed to be specifically the "Hulkbuster" armor from the comics - which everyone wants to see at some point. (Sidebar: Given that War Machine is already wearing Captain America/Iron Patriot colors, it'd be a fun detail if some or all of these other suits are specifically designed to be "supplemental Avengers.")
Also: The shot of Pepper Potts in some kind of harness (and is that her in the sports-bra at 2:01?) returns, though this time it looks like she's actually in the same aparatus we see Guy Pierce's character strapping a bunch of burly henchmen into elsewhere. "Extremis," the storyline this is partially based on, involved turning people into bio-weapons, so take from that what you will.
ALSO: Yes, I've heard all the same gossip about the ending as everybody else has. I dunno whether to buy it or not, but I'm not seeing many indicators of it here.
Sunday, March 3, 2013
Latino Review: "Justice League" Still Planned, Nolan In Charge of DC Universe, Batman NOT Rebooting (UPDATED!)
UPDATE I: Just about the only other guy in the geek-o-sphere as well-informed (or better) than Latino Review's crew is Jeremy "Mr. Beaks" Smith of AICN; and he's chimed in on the story with what sounds like a soft-confirm of LR's reporting: Warner Bros. is willing to empty the bank if it'll get Henry Cavill's Superman and Christian Bale's Batman into a Nolanverse-canon "Justice League" directed by Zack Snyder and produced by the Nolans.
UPDATE II: Forbes.com chimes in, claiming that Latino Review's reporting lines up with a lot of their own. Interesting difference: They stop short of specifying "Justice League" as the project being talked-up, instead describing a team-up film "possibly/probably" featuring other characters. Call me jaded, but chickening-out on a full-blown DC Universe and just doing "Batman Meets Superman" ("this will be a test - see if people are 'ready' yet...") would be a VERY Warner Bros. move, at this juncture.
Continued after jump:
I maybe sounded a little too negative in the original post, but just to be clear: Bale/Nolan being back on makes me sigh for no other reason than, frankly... as much as I really did ADORE "Begins" and "Dark Knight;" I was effectively 'over' Nolan's Batman about an hour before "Rises" had wrapped up. That being said... I can't stress enough just how good the buzz coming out of "Man of Steel" is. If it's really that good, then who knows - maybe this "cocktail" of Nolan the Stern, Joyless Manager and Snyder the Perpetually-Adolescent Firebrand is some kind of special magic.
I just keep going back to ONE thing, though: Think of the most "out-there" DC Universe thing you might hope to see in a movie and ask yourself... "Is Christopher Nolan likely to say YES to this? OR to not water it down into 'realistic' slurry?"
Anyway, original post follows:
Latino Review are the guys for Hollywood scoops-that-aren't-really-just-press-leaks right now, and their batting average is pretty high especially with Warner Bros. movies. So when they say something is in the works, it generally is - whether it makes it to the finish line or not.
They're latest possible scoop doesn't concern stories or characters, but rather business dealings: While Warners is known to have scuttled the current "Justice League" pre-production (re: looking for actors and a director for a now-junked script by Will Beale); it's now an open secret that "industry people" - Warner executives, investors and some higher-level licensing-partners) have seen Zack Snyder's "Man of Steel" and are jumping up and down over it. I don't have LR's sources by any means, but I'm hearing much the same - at least in terms of "huge action, probably a massive hit."
According to LR, what Warners has chosen to take away from this apparent good news is confirmation of something they've believed all along: That Christopher Nolan is the magic-ingredient that makes the DCU "work" onscreen. More details/rumors/claims in the video...
Bullet Points:
This is partially a "panic-reaction" on Warner Bros. part to Whedon re-signing for "Avengers 2" and agreeing to shepherd the next phase(s) of Marvel's slate.
Christopher Nolan "godfathering" production of future DC Universe movies.
Snyder being courted to both produce and direct "Justice League" based on "MoS" performance.
Christian Bale being sought Dumptruck full of money being sought to get Christian Bale back into Bat-Kevlar, thus making "League," "MoS" and future DCU movies canonical with Nolan's Batman trilogy.
"League" may or may not still be on schedule for head-to-head with "Avengers 2," other DCU movies may come in the meantime.
Egh.
For a lot of people, I'm sure this all sounds pretty great. Me? I've never hoped a Latino Review scoop was WRONG more than this. Nolan is a hell of a director/producer, but everyone has their limits and blindspots. I find it entirely plausible that Zack Snyder has made a great Superman movie, but I find it equally plausible that he's done so despite working under a producer who could not be more wrong for that or any other DCU project that isn't Nolan's own drastic reworking of Batman. (Yes, I've heard/gleaned a few tiny bits about "Mos" story/script versus it's visuals. No, I'm not judging or speaking on it now because it's way too miniscule and hearsay-ish, even for gossip.)
I like Nolan, I love his movies, but my opinion remains unchanged that he should have as little to do with DC movies as humanly possible at this point. Putting him "in charge" of the whole thing is akin to making me the lead developer on Madden 2014.
As for Bale... I understand why they want him back, it makes business sense. But retroactive-canon or not, his (and Nolan's) version of Batman can only look ridiculous sharing space with even a "gritty" Superman (to say nothing of Flash or Wonder Woman - though since this is a Nolan project, I'd half expect Wonder Woman to either not even show up or only be onhand to take dictation...) and that's by design of Nolan's movies. I sincerely can't picture a likely scenario whereby Bale-as-Batman wouldn't both drag down any crossover he's present in and lessen Nolan's films by association - just what were all these other metahumans doing that one time a doughy muscleman/dandy in a gas mask was threatening a whole region with a nuke, again?
But... whatever. If this goes through, I'm sure a whole bunch of people will be thrilled and if nothing else it'll be perversely-interesting to see the (presumably continuing) unashamedly comic-esque Marvel slate paired-off against more "gritty realism" from the DC camp. The cash disparity will also be interesting: Marvel is the cheapest studio in town, while Warners is betting on the draw of big names (at least within the genre) for this and that means shelling out big coin for the likes of Bale (and don't think the Nolan Bros. aren't looking for a big payday to grin and bear more funnybook projects, too) to show up. They were willing to dump over $200 Million trying to make "Green Lantern" work - who knows what kind of "Waterworld"/"Avatar"-level spending will go down here?
UPDATE II: Forbes.com chimes in, claiming that Latino Review's reporting lines up with a lot of their own. Interesting difference: They stop short of specifying "Justice League" as the project being talked-up, instead describing a team-up film "possibly/probably" featuring other characters. Call me jaded, but chickening-out on a full-blown DC Universe and just doing "Batman Meets Superman" ("this will be a test - see if people are 'ready' yet...") would be a VERY Warner Bros. move, at this juncture.
Continued after jump:
I maybe sounded a little too negative in the original post, but just to be clear: Bale/Nolan being back on makes me sigh for no other reason than, frankly... as much as I really did ADORE "Begins" and "Dark Knight;" I was effectively 'over' Nolan's Batman about an hour before "Rises" had wrapped up. That being said... I can't stress enough just how good the buzz coming out of "Man of Steel" is. If it's really that good, then who knows - maybe this "cocktail" of Nolan the Stern, Joyless Manager and Snyder the Perpetually-Adolescent Firebrand is some kind of special magic.I just keep going back to ONE thing, though: Think of the most "out-there" DC Universe thing you might hope to see in a movie and ask yourself... "Is Christopher Nolan likely to say YES to this? OR to not water it down into 'realistic' slurry?"
Anyway, original post follows:
Latino Review are the guys for Hollywood scoops-that-aren't-really-just-press-leaks right now, and their batting average is pretty high especially with Warner Bros. movies. So when they say something is in the works, it generally is - whether it makes it to the finish line or not.
They're latest possible scoop doesn't concern stories or characters, but rather business dealings: While Warners is known to have scuttled the current "Justice League" pre-production (re: looking for actors and a director for a now-junked script by Will Beale); it's now an open secret that "industry people" - Warner executives, investors and some higher-level licensing-partners) have seen Zack Snyder's "Man of Steel" and are jumping up and down over it. I don't have LR's sources by any means, but I'm hearing much the same - at least in terms of "huge action, probably a massive hit."
According to LR, what Warners has chosen to take away from this apparent good news is confirmation of something they've believed all along: That Christopher Nolan is the magic-ingredient that makes the DCU "work" onscreen. More details/rumors/claims in the video...
Bullet Points:
This is partially a "panic-reaction" on Warner Bros. part to Whedon re-signing for "Avengers 2" and agreeing to shepherd the next phase(s) of Marvel's slate.
Christopher Nolan "godfathering" production of future DC Universe movies.
Snyder being courted to both produce and direct "Justice League" based on "MoS" performance.
"League" may or may not still be on schedule for head-to-head with "Avengers 2," other DCU movies may come in the meantime.
Egh.
For a lot of people, I'm sure this all sounds pretty great. Me? I've never hoped a Latino Review scoop was WRONG more than this. Nolan is a hell of a director/producer, but everyone has their limits and blindspots. I find it entirely plausible that Zack Snyder has made a great Superman movie, but I find it equally plausible that he's done so despite working under a producer who could not be more wrong for that or any other DCU project that isn't Nolan's own drastic reworking of Batman. (Yes, I've heard/gleaned a few tiny bits about "Mos" story/script versus it's visuals. No, I'm not judging or speaking on it now because it's way too miniscule and hearsay-ish, even for gossip.)
I like Nolan, I love his movies, but my opinion remains unchanged that he should have as little to do with DC movies as humanly possible at this point. Putting him "in charge" of the whole thing is akin to making me the lead developer on Madden 2014.
As for Bale... I understand why they want him back, it makes business sense. But retroactive-canon or not, his (and Nolan's) version of Batman can only look ridiculous sharing space with even a "gritty" Superman (to say nothing of Flash or Wonder Woman - though since this is a Nolan project, I'd half expect Wonder Woman to either not even show up or only be onhand to take dictation...) and that's by design of Nolan's movies. I sincerely can't picture a likely scenario whereby Bale-as-Batman wouldn't both drag down any crossover he's present in and lessen Nolan's films by association - just what were all these other metahumans doing that one time a doughy muscleman/dandy in a gas mask was threatening a whole region with a nuke, again?
But... whatever. If this goes through, I'm sure a whole bunch of people will be thrilled and if nothing else it'll be perversely-interesting to see the (presumably continuing) unashamedly comic-esque Marvel slate paired-off against more "gritty realism" from the DC camp. The cash disparity will also be interesting: Marvel is the cheapest studio in town, while Warners is betting on the draw of big names (at least within the genre) for this and that means shelling out big coin for the likes of Bale (and don't think the Nolan Bros. aren't looking for a big payday to grin and bear more funnybook projects, too) to show up. They were willing to dump over $200 Million trying to make "Green Lantern" work - who knows what kind of "Waterworld"/"Avatar"-level spending will go down here?
Saturday, March 2, 2013
Sports History to Be Made Sunday 3/3
Don't know how many NFL fans are among my regular readers, but for those who aren't up on it this coming Sunday is set to become something of a historical date-of-note for the sport: Lauren Silberman, an MIT graduate and former soccer player, is set to get an actual, official NFL tryout at the Regional Combine - making her the first woman in NFL history to do so.
Her chances aren't considered to be all that spectacular (but then, Tim Tebow has an NFL career so who can really say anymore?) but if nothing else it's going to be a conversation-piece in the sports world for a bit and a Trivia question in the near future, so... keep an eye on that, I guess.
Her chances aren't considered to be all that spectacular (but then, Tim Tebow has an NFL career so who can really say anymore?) but if nothing else it's going to be a conversation-piece in the sports world for a bit and a Trivia question in the near future, so... keep an eye on that, I guess.
Friday, March 1, 2013
Oh, Please Just Go Away, Kevin Smith
Imagine if, after "Jackie Brown" wasn't the biggest thing ever; that instead of taking some time to dig in and truly connect with what he wanted to do with film and what made him "tick" as an artist (results re: "Kill Bill," "Grindhouse," "Inglorious Basterds" and now "Django" speak for themselves) ...Quentin Tarantino had decided to say "fuck it" and just making variations-on/revisitations-of "Pulp Fiction" and "Reservoir Dogs" while staying comfy on merchandising from films and characters he'd made during a relatively brief period of relevance in the pop-cultural wasteland of the 90s.
Well, if Tarantino had fallen that far AND people were still telling him he was "the man" because he does podcasts and speaking engagements where he tells allegedly fascinating stories about how he almost made a "Superman" that one time... he'd be Kevin Smith. The latest thing Smith Inc. is (correctly) certain that his fanbase will pay live-appearance prices to see on a roadshow is an animated Jay & Silent Bob movie that appears to at least partially be a "Bluntman & Chronic" movie - the one-joke idiocy of which (i.e. making a movie about them) he devoted a huge chunk of "Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back" to skewering...
Ugh. The obvious jokes. The "nostalgiac" callbacks to fans-only comics making nostalgiac callbacks to the movies. The John K.-wannabe animation. Why? Why is this?
And before anyone brings it up - it took me a LONG time to finally turn around on Smith. I love "Clerks." I love "Mallrats" in a different way. I respect "Chasing Amy." I love "Dogma." "Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back" is hilarious. I even like the "Clerks" animated series and "Clerks 2" has some really powerful/funny stuff in there that at the time signaled he might have "figured shit out."
But he's been blowing it ever since, and his "aw, geez" self-promoter schtick was tired for a loooong time before that. His B.S. about film critics and all the nonsense that went down around "Red State"... no, I'm done with him.
Well, if Tarantino had fallen that far AND people were still telling him he was "the man" because he does podcasts and speaking engagements where he tells allegedly fascinating stories about how he almost made a "Superman" that one time... he'd be Kevin Smith. The latest thing Smith Inc. is (correctly) certain that his fanbase will pay live-appearance prices to see on a roadshow is an animated Jay & Silent Bob movie that appears to at least partially be a "Bluntman & Chronic" movie - the one-joke idiocy of which (i.e. making a movie about them) he devoted a huge chunk of "Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back" to skewering...
Ugh. The obvious jokes. The "nostalgiac" callbacks to fans-only comics making nostalgiac callbacks to the movies. The John K.-wannabe animation. Why? Why is this?
And before anyone brings it up - it took me a LONG time to finally turn around on Smith. I love "Clerks." I love "Mallrats" in a different way. I respect "Chasing Amy." I love "Dogma." "Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back" is hilarious. I even like the "Clerks" animated series and "Clerks 2" has some really powerful/funny stuff in there that at the time signaled he might have "figured shit out."
But he's been blowing it ever since, and his "aw, geez" self-promoter schtick was tired for a loooong time before that. His B.S. about film critics and all the nonsense that went down around "Red State"... no, I'm done with him.
Escape to The Movies: "Jack The Giant Slayer"
"Those Who Fight" Trailer, (Briefly) Featuring Yours Truly...
I know firsthand that not everyone likes the way that certain slices of the "Internet Geek Criticism Community" have evolved from host-segments to full-on sketches to characters and continuity; and I'll be the first to concede that the roster of people really making it "work" isn't exactly massive. But there's an energy and vibrancy to the idea of it that I truly, sincerely dig. There are two important "movements" happening in the grassroots of Geek/Fandom Culture right now: The rise of new-gen criticism-as-performance-art that feels very much like the start of a YouTube/Blip-era equivalent to the rise of Cahiers du Cinema in the 60s and the homemade-indie film movement happening across much of the same space; and this is where the two come together. "Those Who Fight," which now has a trailer, seems to be part of this continued evolution.
I'm not actually privy to much of what "Those Who Fight" actually is, apart from that it's supposedly in the same vein (though not officially connected to) the various TGWTG "crossover" specials and anniversary movies, and that it's creators opted to add some scale to the production by shooting some scenes at the most recent MAGFest - scooping up whichever fellow web-personalities they could among the attendees for cameos, walk-ons, what-have-you.
Leo Thompson ("That Scifi Guy") and Lewis "Linkara" Lovhaug feature prominently in the current trailer. I was only there for a quick bit of it (a big mass-brawl scene, you can see my bald-ish head bringing up the rear around 1:31 and 1:42) but I look forward to seeing how it comes together. For this sort of project, it seems fairly ambitious.
I'm not actually privy to much of what "Those Who Fight" actually is, apart from that it's supposedly in the same vein (though not officially connected to) the various TGWTG "crossover" specials and anniversary movies, and that it's creators opted to add some scale to the production by shooting some scenes at the most recent MAGFest - scooping up whichever fellow web-personalities they could among the attendees for cameos, walk-ons, what-have-you.
Leo Thompson ("That Scifi Guy") and Lewis "Linkara" Lovhaug feature prominently in the current trailer. I was only there for a quick bit of it (a big mass-brawl scene, you can see my bald-ish head bringing up the rear around 1:31 and 1:42) but I look forward to seeing how it comes together. For this sort of project, it seems fairly ambitious.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)