RE: Forest of the Sith: Social Thread v3.0

That was before they realized that they could release on a Wednesday and not have to compete for the weekend business. Although in this case, it makes sense to do that because that way no other movies will have to compete with Star Wars.

In a way, it's courteous.

Now, according to the information that I have, the film is being released on the 19th - which, actually, is a Thursday. Proof

The countdown timer on that news page is still incorrect. The countdown timer on top of this page is incorrect also.

My Countdown Timer IS correct. It is counting down to the moment that the calendar day switches. 12:00AM (midnight) on the 19th. 'Round these parts, the first showing is midnight the day it is released.
Is it like that everywhere?!?

 

Yep.

--Jamball

 

Midnight showings rule. Love 'em!

Sage H.

 

You know, I've been thinking of making a quick movie with a cheap camera and windows movie maker...


Just to see if the difference in equipment and software really makes that much difference.


Really, if you don't use the tools you've got, why pay hundreds of dollars for the tools you ALSO won't use.


And I'm still lost as to whether to get maya or 3ds max.


Not that I use blender...

 

Hey, I'd gladly take your Dcr-VX2000 if you're not using it Paladin.

 

LMAO!


Haha, that hit me just right.... I dunno why, but it did...


One thing that I've noticed is that Fig's camera has much better quality than mine.


Of course, his cost more, so whadduya expect?


By the way, my firearms instructor and good friend Jim Crews gave me the definition of an expert while he was here.


Ex = has been.
Spert = a drip of water under pressure.

Expert = has been drip of water under pressure.


Enjoy.

 

You guys wanna see something funny?

Go to the fan films main page and take a look at what the Cast and Crew database link is pointing to.



Thank you to MaxVeers.

 

HA!! Nice goin' durb!


:::begins to sing old church hymns:::


Oh Victory, in MaxVeers,
Durbs Saviour, for a couple minutes...

 

Hey guys... Just saw this posted and NP2K..

If anyone's interested:
Resident Evil 2 Poster Contest

Good Luck!

 

I did enjoy LotR. I did not enjoy Kill Bill Vol 1.

LotR= The only trilogy to rival SW and Indy
Kill Bill= Dorkman's outlook on Reloaded + Revolutions

(IMO)

I really don't understand why it was recieved as such a great film...I mean it was just a bunch of violence with a paper-thin story to tie it together. Also...the bit about me falling asleep...that was because the fight scene...to me...wasn't that great.

KB < The Matrix Trilogy (in terms of entertainment)

(And I hated even the first Matrix)

Oh well...end of my rant.

Also...I added a comment about "Why Alderaan?" for ya Durb. Break a leg at the final showdown this year.

 

Let's bomb Canada.

Um. After I get away from it.

 

Hey, thanks a lot there Mr. Cramer! That was a cool review!
In fact, thank you to everyone who gave me good reviews...

Thanks to the ones with the lousy reviews too. I don't want anyone lieing.

 

Wow, "lieing" just looks . . . weird. What an odd looking word.

Congrats Durb! (Almost spelled your name "Drub" ).


Why does it hurt so much when you pull nose hairs? Man! Those are painful. They almost always bring me to tears.

--Jamball

 

Yes, Cramer is definitely the Antifilm.

I hope he hates my fan film. Then I'll know it's good.

M. Scott

 

it was just a bunch of violence with a paper-thin story to tie it together

That's what I thought when I saw Volume 1 too. Then I saw Volume 2, which has all of the story and a lot less violence. I think they split it up badly, it would have worked a lot better with an equal amount of violence and story in each part (or as just one movie) IMO. But having seen Volume 2, which I thought was a GREAT movie, I can appreciate the cool stuff in Volume 1, knowing that that's not all there is to it.

 

I hope he hates my fan film. Then I'll know it's good.

Well... He liked at least one of mine. What does that say about my stuff?

On the same subject... I liked Kill Bill 1 and 2 both a LOT! As far as the Matrix goes, I like the first one, the 2nd had promise, the 3rd totally blew it.
And, Indy is NOT a trilogy. I've made this argument before. 3 films a trilogy does not make. That would be a movie and 2 sequels. It needs to be written as a trilogy to qualify. Technically, the first SW is not a trilogy either. The new movies ARE a trilogy.


About nose hairs... Yeah, they suck alright. If it makes you feel any better, they grow faster and more often as you get older. There's something to look forward to.

 

And, Indy is NOT a trilogy. I've made this argument before. 3 films a trilogy does not make.

Well, yes and no. By definition a collection of three related works is a trilogy. But I see what you're saying; unlike other trilogies out there, Indy possesses no unified story, just three stories about the same character.

That would be a movie and 2 sequels. It needs to be written as a trilogy to qualify.

By that definition the only trilogy that has ever been made is LOTR.

Technically, the first SW is not a trilogy either.

Nor Back to the Future, The Matrix, Terminator, Jurassic Park, the Alien movies (which of course are now up to 4 anyhow), the Batman movies (there were only 3 -- Batman and Robin does not exist), Spy Kids, Sergio Leone's "Dollars" (otherwise known as the Man with No Name) trilogy, or, as I said, any other trilogy of films that ever has been made besides LOTR, which obviously was genuinely created as a trilogy from beginning to end.

The new movies ARE a trilogy.

No, he's making them up as he goes and writing each one as he comes to it. There's no question in my mind. Otherwise the story would be much better achieved. But we already went through this in the last social thread.

M. Scott

 

About nose hairs... Yeah, they suck alright. If it makes you feel any better, they grow faster and more often as you get older. There's something to look forward to.

!

 

I'm inclined to agree with you there, Dorkman. Although, I think I would be more lenient with Back to the Future, only because the stories DID interlock. Indy was 3 completely different stories with 1 main character.
A trilogy, by my deffinition, has to be more than a couple of common characters with a totally different story. It has to be one very loooooong story that took 3 chapters to tell.
And, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt on the present SW trilogy. At least it was intended to be 3 movies from the onset. That's a step the right way. The first set, on the other hand finished with the first movie. Then, to George's utter delight the movie was a HUGE hit. Suddenly he was allowed to write 2 more. That's not really a trilogy.

 

Technically the BTTF movies were written as just the first one, like SW. When it was a hit, they came up with the other two.

They lucked out and the stories interlocked brilliantly (except for 3, which was kind of out of the ballpark but still entertaining -- and that train at the end is so cool I forgive the rest of the movie for being completely left-field), but it was still not WRITTEN as a trilogy. Just to be semantically accurate. If you accept BTTF as a trilogy, you have to accept the OT.

M. Scott

 

Would you consider the Leathal Weapon series a tri . . Quadilogy?

--Jamball

 

Quadrilogy is the technical term.

Then pentology, hexology, heptology, octology, septology, and decilogy.

I think only James Bond and Godzilla have gone higher, and by our definitions of requiring an interlocking story, they don't count.

I'm actually planning to write a sci-fi/fantasy book series of truly interlocking stories (we'll see if I ever get around to it) following a convention much like Sue Grafton's "A is for Arson," "B is for Bludgeon," "C is for Cockamamie" or whatever the titles are, except using the Greek alphabet (two less letters. ).

If I ever manage this, the result would be a icosikaitetrology of books. Get your tongue around THAT one.

M. Scott

 

what!?! no mention of the Evil Dead films? i realize an argument could be made that they do not qualify as a trilogy either, but im surprised that there has been no mention of them one way or the other...

as for the nose hair thing, now theres yet another reason to fear growing older, or at least now there is one...

BTW, do three nose hairs count as a trilogy? LOL

just kidding...

 

Evil Dead totally doesn't count. II is really, only a remake.


I'm sure that there are some porn series that go WAY above 'quadrilogy' status. In fact, I volunteer to go find out.

 

what!?! no mention of the Evil Dead films? i realize an argument could be made that they do not qualify as a trilogy either, but im surprised that there has been no mention of them one way or the other...

LOL. They're literally one film made three times and everyone knows it.

Okay, Army of Darkness is different, but I and II are literally the same film done twice.

In other news, and speaking of my film, this morning at lightsaber training we were learning some new moves and I deflected an uppercut by my opponent directly into my face.

It looks worse than it is, but even minor scars are cool.

To bad it'll probably heal up entirely in a few days.

M. Scott