Results 1 to 20 of 473

Thread: 2015 Off Topic Thread

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senior Member SPX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    23,876
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludo View Post
    Exodus was dogshit, man. Australians and Scots playing egyptians with british accents, in a film where they couldn't even get the material of sword blades right. The dialogue was gay, the story was worse, and the choices in casting were even bigger disappointments than the way the movie turned out after all that hype.
    Nope.

    First off, Joel Edgerton did a damn good job as Ramses. How you could criticize that performance I have no idea. And I have no idea why you would think the dialogue was gay or the story was gay. Actually, I bet I do know. It's biblical. Biblical shit probably just doesn't fly with you.
    I heart cock

  2. #2
    Senior Member Ludo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,932
    Rep Power
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by SPX View Post
    Nope.

    First off, Joel Edgerton did a damn good job as Ramses. How you could criticize that performance I have no idea. And I have no idea why you would think the dialogue was gay or the story was gay. Actually, I bet I do know. It's biblical. Biblical shit probably just doesn't fly with you.
    Biblical shit flies just fine with me. I enjoyed "The Bible" mini series that History channel did. First off, how can you defend a film in which almost every fucking character was blonde haired, blue eyed, with a british accent, and european features?
    I'm sorry, but my suspended disbelief only goes so far when they fuck up the easy shit. Steel fucking swords, that weren't even the right shape in some or all of the battle scenes, when they weren't even out of the Bronze age yet. Again, this is easy shit. Casting the Scot from Alien Vs Predator as an Egyptian when he has an accent thicker than Sean Connery's is the worst casting decision since they casted Connery as an Egyptian named Juan Sanchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez.

    Spike recently had a mini series, Tut, which was worlds better than Ramses. And it didn't need a made up monkey shit storyline to be better, either.
    Last edited by Ludo; 08-20-2015 at 02:42 PM.
    2013: +8.24u(increased unit size on 5/19)
    Favorites: 20-6 + 6.13u
    Underdogs: 10-19 -2.51u
    Ludo's Locks Parlay Project: +1.4u

    2012: +20.311u

  3. #3
    Senior Member SPX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    23,876
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludo View Post
    Biblical shit flies just fine with me. I enjoyed "The Bible" mini series that History channel did. First off, how can you defend a film in which almost every fucking character was blonde haired, blue eyed, with a british accent, and european features?

    I'm sorry, but my suspended disbelief only goes so far when they fuck up the easy shit. Steel fucking swords, that weren't even the right shape in some or all of the battle scenes, when they weren't even out of the Bronze age yet. Again, this is easy shit. Casting the Scot from Alien Vs Predator as an Egyptian when he has an accent thicker than Sean Connery's is the worst casting decision since they casted Connery as an Egyptian named Juan Sanchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez.

    Spike recently had a mini series, Tut, which was worlds better than Ramses. And it didn't need a made up monkey shit storyline to be better, either.
    First, I'm surprised you liked The Bible. From what I know of you, it doesn't seem like your style. But I also liked it. And I also want to see Tut, so that one's on the list.

    As for Exodus, it seems that most of your complaints are technical: The people aren't dark enough for you, the accents aren't right, the swords are made of steel (this one honestly didn't even begin to occur to me), etc. I didn't concern myself too much with all that. I thought it was an interesting story that was well-told and the movie also had some of the most beautiful visuals I had seen the whole year.

    8/10
    I heart cock

  4. #4
    Senior Member Ludo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,932
    Rep Power
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by SPX View Post
    First, I'm surprised you liked The Bible. From what I know of you, it doesn't seem like your style. But I also liked it. And I also want to see Tut, so that one's on the list.

    As for Exodus, it seems that most of your complaints are technical: The people aren't dark enough for you, the accents aren't right, the swords are made of steel (this one honestly didn't even begin to occur to me), etc. I didn't concern myself too much with all that. I thought it was an interesting story that was well-told and the movie also had some of the most beautiful visuals I had seen the whole year.

    8/10
    I don't usually demand a full on 100% technically accurate depiction of things. Don't get me wrong. I like a little ironic spoofing in there sometimes. It's just that the little shit was so glaringly wrong right off the bat, and the final product in the grand scheme of things, really didn't impress me at all. It felt like another excuse to show the public how far special effects have come along when you throw $150,000,000 into one production.

    To be fair, Noah was much, much worse.

    Tut was awesome. They used actual kopesh swords, the people had the right features, everything looked much more historically accurate. And the story didn't need a whole lot of doctoring for dramatic effect. If you liked Ramses, Tut will blow you away, I think.
    2013: +8.24u(increased unit size on 5/19)
    Favorites: 20-6 + 6.13u
    Underdogs: 10-19 -2.51u
    Ludo's Locks Parlay Project: +1.4u

    2012: +20.311u

  5. #5
    Senior Member SPX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    23,876
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludo View Post
    I don't usually demand a full on 100% technically accurate depiction of things. Don't get me wrong. I like a little ironic spoofing in there sometimes. It's just that the little shit was so glaringly wrong right off the bat, and the final product in the grand scheme of things, really didn't impress me at all. It felt like another excuse to show the public how far special effects have come along when you throw $150,000,000 into one production.
    Did you not at least think Joel Edgerton was great?


    Quote Originally Posted by Ludo View Post
    To be fair, Noah was much, much worse.
    Noah was an insane movie. Literally insane. The story is just fucking crazy. You know what kind of movie you're watching when the rocket launcher comes out. All bets are off at that point.

    It's the kind of movie I'm glad I saw once, but I really suspect I will never watch it again.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ludo View Post
    Tut was awesome. They used actual kopesh swords, the people had the right features, everything looked much more historically accurate. And the story didn't need a whole lot of doctoring for dramatic effect. If you liked Ramses, Tut will blow you away, I think.
    But is Ben Kingsley really any more authentic than any other Brit?
    I heart cock

  6. #6
    Senior Member Ludo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,932
    Rep Power
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by SPX View Post
    Did you not at least think Joel Edgerton was great?




    Noah was an insane movie. Literally insane. The story is just fucking crazy. You know what kind of movie you're watching when the rocket launcher comes out. All bets are off at that point.

    It's the kind of movie I'm glad I saw once, but I really suspect I will never watch it again.




    But is Ben Kingsley really any more authentic than any other Brit?
    Noah was laughable to be honest. While watching it I literally started laughing during certain scenes. Like the fucking Neverending Story-esque rock angels, the rocket launcher, Beowulf stowing away on the Arc, Russel Crowe being a fat, alcoholic looking puffy faced Noah who didn't seem at all tortured by the choices he had to make in following God's will, etc etc etc.

    I didn't like Joel as Ramses to be honest. He looked more like Ragnar Lothbrok than Ramses to me. It was just disappointing that they couldn't at least find someone who looked the part a little more. It seemed to me more that they let Christian Bale do most of the heavy lifting where performances were concerned, and you know I'm not a fan of Bale.

    Kingsly played his part beautifully, and he has just the right look to play a multitude of parts. The only thing that ever betrays him is the accent, but he tends to put in work that sort of helps you forget he's British. He immerses himself so well.
    2013: +8.24u(increased unit size on 5/19)
    Favorites: 20-6 + 6.13u
    Underdogs: 10-19 -2.51u
    Ludo's Locks Parlay Project: +1.4u

    2012: +20.311u

  7. #7
    Senior Member SPX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    23,876
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludo View Post
    I didn't like Joel as Ramses to be honest. He looked more like Ragnar Lothbrok than Ramses to me.
    Ah, so you've been watching Vikings. In my opinion that is one of the very best shows on TV. In fact, for me it's probably #2 right behind Game of Thrones.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ludo View Post
    Kingsley played his part beautifully, and he has just the right look to play a multitude of parts. The only thing that ever betrays him is the accent, but he tends to put in work that sort of helps you forget he's British. He immerses himself so well.
    Kingsley has has an interesting career. Despite his talent, he'll be in ANYTHING. You give him money, he'll be in your shit.

    One minute he'll be turning in an Oscar-calibur performance in something like Ghandi and the next he'll be slumming it in a straight-to-DVD video game movie like Bloodrayne.
    I heart cock

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •