MovieChat Forums > Philhelm > Replies
Philhelm's Replies
I thought that part was silly, and was an obvious ploy to get an Alien 3 Ripley throwback and up the action. The problem is that as Alien has already proven, less is sometimes more. I prefer the creepy slowness of the original Big Chap.
I think so, since that would be one heck of a coincidence. Just a little Easter egg for the audience.
He was a pimp/gangster in an episode of 1987's Werewolf. I think the episode was called The Unicorn.
Walz already locked up the horse vote.
If I had only known that this would happen, I wouldn't have voted for Trump already.
I'd have to think about the second movie, but the first that comes to mind is The Rock. The movie was good clean fun.
EDIT: I also liked 8mm, since it was so dark.
My contender is Sharon Stone, specifically in Total Recall when she tells Arnold that he can tie her up if he wants.
Kamala Harris is as dumb as a person can be without being cross-eyed or having stubby fingers. People talked about George Bush, Jr. being stupid because of his folksy buffoonery, but Kamala is the real deal.
No, some approaches to filmmaking are more timeless than others. Someone could probably watch Saving Private Ryan, or perhaps even movies like Boyz 'n the Hood or American History X (as relevant gang examples) 50 years from now without issue. Colors seems to have a twinge of '80s campiness/tropes that definitely date the movie in a way that my previous examples are not dated.
My favorite characters are Boyd and Father Khatri, and their interactions. I actually do like Jade though, since he doesn't seem content to just take it laying down.
B.C. is "Big Chap," the nickname for the original 1979 alien. I thought he was wasted since he got the Hicks and Newt treatment (offscreen death). Why dig him up to do him dirty?
The birth scene from The Fly II comes to mind, but this was probably more graphic.
I'd probably give it a 6.5 - 7 score. Alien and Aliens were 10/10 hotties, whereas Alien: Romulus was a cute girl next door; not as hot, but I wouldn't be ashamed to tell my friends about her.
The consensus was right about Andy and Rain. Andy was the best character, but Rain didn't annoy me, and might just be the best wannabe Ripley of the series. The other characters were kind of bland, but I would probably rank Kay the best of them.
I didn't like the end so much, nor the design. I also didn't like some of the overly blatant homages to previous films.
As far as the plot, the worst part was probably the facehugger/temperature thing, since the implication is that they would be incapable on performing on a hot summer day. It was a bit too much for me.
Also, B.C. was wasted, but his off-screen death might have been a homage to Hicks and Newt.
How were his scenes?
I've always said that Wesley Snipes/Blade never got enough credit for the rise of Marvel movies. He's still one of the best.
Trump already faced Hillary Clinton, who was probably widely viewed as the strongest female candidate on the board. Kamala Harris might be VP (a do-nothing job) but she's an airhead, so I think the answer to your question within the context of it being posted in Kamala Harris' discussion forum is, "No."
The weirdest part is that her base is comprised of degenerates. The guy that wants to breastfeed his nephew is the same one calling you weird. Go figure.
I agree with you in principle, since I'm somewhat of a free speech purist. However, I'm okay allowing the people who ruined things take a few hits so that they realize why it should have never been this way.
Probably because today, they wouldn't be able to agree which of the 167 sexes/genders the main characters should be. Basic Instinct and Fatal Attraction were too heteronormative.
My hope/expectation is that while it won't be as good as Game of Thrones at its best, that it might be more even in quality throughout the seasons. Part of the problem is that despite his faults, GRRM is a good writer. The first 3 - 4 seasons of Game of Thrones were so good because the showrunners already had a script. Once they ran out of source material it became glaringly obvious that GRRM was a necessary component.
Even fantasy settings benefit from verisimilitude, or a sense of realness. I think the issue for OP is that there isn't much to imply that Westeros has any advanced scientific knowledge, or that they employ magic to heal injuries. So while, yes, dragons may exist within this setting, people still receive injuries and have limited means to recover from them as far as the audience is aware. In contrast, Beric Dondarrion's resurrections from R'hllor weren't questioned because it was obviously magic/divine intervention, so there wasn't any internal logical inconsistency.