MeYouFools's Replies


Oh, bitch, bitch, bitch. Hush. Yeah, it's all over the place. People that didn't like this movie, all I hear from you is "I hate fun." He apparently wasn't because there's behind the scenes footage of Keaton in full makeup speaking to the crew in his real voice saying, "I haven't had this much fun making a movie since... 'Beetlejuice'!" 10-10. I had a hellaciously fun time seeing the movie. And it was even better the second time around with friends. "Beetlejuice" is the superior movie. But "Beetlejuice Beetlejuice" is more fun. Apparently Burton tried to make something with the Maitlands at the end of the movie, but took it out of the final cut because he said something like "All the de-aging AI in the world isn't enough to make this work." Something like that. "Eastwood's ego was too big to play Harmonica." "I can't imagine Eastwood playing Harmonica" And he didn't. But also, he was not slated to play Harmonica. He was meant to be the Man With No Name. Harmonica was invented when it became apparent Eastwood would have nothing more to do with Leone. You're talking about something that never happened like it did. You're not wrong about Eastwood's ego (he was already pretty annoyed that Lee Van Cleef stole "For a Few Dollars More" away from him and Eli Wallach did same in GBU), but Leone didn't care about any of that and you're conflating things that are not germane. "I wanted to see how they'd win against a OP villain w/o the helmet." You saw that. That's literally how they save the universe(s). Don't like that they didn't do it with violence? That's on you. ^^^^ This one's your answer. Seriously, nobody went with Scott Eastwood for the Man With No Name? I would say it was the obvious choice, but apparently, it's not. He's Chaotic Good. When the Man With No Name ministers to the dying Confederate boy for no other reason than it was the right thing to do and then lets him keep his duster, the universe immediately rewards him with something infinitely cooler to wear. Tuco obviously had no interest in the poor boy and Setenza likely would've just shot him to put him out of his misery. Godzilla's been woke as fxxk since 1954. If you have a problem with "woke," then Godzilla isn't for you. Oh, hell, those are terrible! These are not the real episodes... they are a [poor] recreation of them. Look carefully: the words are not in the proper positioning and the fonts aren't the same. I want to watch the real show that I'd been watching since '93, not some fancy recreation of it just because it's a little sharper. A cameo wasn't happening. Stallone and producer Irwin Winkler are feuding because Winkler did some shady backdoor deal to get the rights to Rocky all for himself, which apparently is in violation of the deal made between Stallone, Winkler, and other "Rocky" producer Robert Chartoff back in the 70s. Stallone has said he would love to do "Creed IV" with Jordan directing... but the caveat is that Winkler cannot be involved. The end credits claims Stallone is an "executive producer," but he's come out and said he had absolutely nothing to do with the making of the movie. "they could have just killed him off, off-screen, between the events of Creed II and Creed III." Get therapy, will ya? Besides, Irwin Winkler said that Rocky will not be dying while he's still alive. He already saved Rocky from being killed by Stallone in "Rocky V" and Ryan Coogler in "Creed." Killing the character now is just stupid. Don't the blu-rays have all the episodes cropped from their original 4:3 format into 1.85 standard widescreen so the top and bottom of the images are chopped off, whereas the older DVD releases have their original full 4:3 academy ratio format? "I have't seen any of the more recent episodes" If you were a fan of the series in its original iteration, then you're missing out. Seasons 10 and 11 have some great episodes. "but I hear they weren't anywhere close to what the show used to be." This is the problem people take with long-running shows. They're constantly comparing it to a moment in time that is gone. Instead, you should be comparing the current iteration of any show to what is on television with it NOW. It's not in competition with itself; it's in competition with the shows around it. "His being from the Carolinas doesn't 100% guarantee that he was a CSA soldier though." I guess you're right about that, but do keep in mind the movie was written by Italians and would they know the nuances of the American Civil War and its politics of the time? Probably not. Of course, Leone would do his homework for "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly," but for this one? Also probably not. I believe writer Luciano Vincenzioni claimed that the Man With No Name took that gold and gave it to Father Ramirez's mission and that's why he's poor again at the beginning of "A Fistful of Dollars." If this is so, it's reasonable to assume he also gave them Setenza's Arabian stallion and traded it for a mule they had on hand. So, at the end of "For a Few Dollars More" (which chronologically is the last adventure), Il Straniero/Joe/Manco/Blondie/The Man With No Name is going to be a rich man once again (but not owe his life to anyone this time) and could retire as he postulates to Colonel Mortimer at one point. This is not true. Firstly, Eastwood played him in all three films as the same man. Secondly, in "For a Few Dollars More," Eastwood is known as "Manco," which in Italian means "mangled." It is a reference to his right hand being crushed by Chico at the end of "A Fistful of Dollars." If you pay close attention in "For a Few," Eastwood wears a gauntlet over his right hand and does everything in the movie with his left hand... except shoot. Additionally, if you pay closer attention, you can find the bullet holes in the Man With No Name's poncho from where Ramon had shot him in the previous movie. He wears the holes to his back, though (I believe). In the screenplay for "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly," while he is only referred to in the dialogue as "Blondie/Il Biondo," the character himself is identified as "Joe" in the action descriptions. Leone and Vincenzioni meant for him to be the same man. Well, you know, he was a civil war officer on the side of the Confederacy (he's specifically said to be from Carolina). The war was over and I don't believe the U.S. army would've allowed Confederates into their ranks. "Colonel" is a title for him now, not a rank. So his skills in fighting in the war would have parlayed into bounty hunting well.