On December 14 2012 01:46 Conti wrote: Can anyone explain the connection to GLaDOS to me? I mean, I'm totally gonna watch the hell out of this for del Toro being the director alone, but the GLaDOS involvement seemed kind of.. random. I mean, it's not the character they are taking (um.. right?), but just the voice. That's so weird.
Is there some kind of official explanation for this?
Nerds love the voice?
Personally I hope Del Toro brings a bit more to this, the trailer looks a bit cookie cutter. I will see it, but I am getting distinct Hellboy vibes, in that it seems less quality than his darker fantasy films.
Not really. Nerds love the dark humor associated with the voice. And this doesn't look like a movie that will be even close to that kind of humor.
Maybe she'll get a few moments in the spotlight, it is likely just a marketing ploy. If your giant robot talks, and you can get some more tickets sold with a voice why not? If you are a movie goer who never played portal it is really all the same to you anyway.
True. I'm still hoping there's more to it than that, though. del Toro usually isn't that cheap.
Here is to hoping. The man has a lot of integrity, I especially appreciate his dedication to costumes like in Pan's Labyrinth. I one am one of those guys that prefers Yoda as a puppet though. I hope he doesn't go overly Michael Bay, though based on the trailer he actually has a reason to.
People make a good point, this movie is totally not about the drama or the plot, it's about big robots and rocket punches. I'll probably see it with friends
On December 13 2012 13:50 Warlock40 wrote: I guess this was supposed to be an homage to Gundam and Godzilla, but it looks more like a terrible Battleship/Transformers mashup. At least it has Guillermo del Toro and pretty explosions. Although as expected for this genre, many of the explosions make no sense whatsoever, like the fighter jet blowing up at 0:41.
huh?
the monster takes a swipe at the jet
Why is the jet even there in the first place? Jets don't fly that close to buildings that they are attacking, much less gigantic moving monsters with reach. They have these things called missiles that can lock on from twenty miles away. Sure, we see them using cannons in the movie trailer, but those things still have a range of several miles. I get that this is a movie about giant robots and giant monsters, but this isn't a complaint about lack of realism, it's a complaint about lack of common sense. Same reason why Prometheus was absolutely terrible. I like Idris Elba and all, but he couldn't save that garbage, and I don't think he can save this one.
On December 13 2012 13:50 Warlock40 wrote: I guess this was supposed to be an homage to Gundam and Godzilla, but it looks more like a terrible Battleship/Transformers mashup. At least it has Guillermo del Toro and pretty explosions. Although as expected for this genre, many of the explosions make no sense whatsoever, like the fighter jet blowing up at 0:41.
huh?
the monster takes a swipe at the jet
Why is the jet even there in the first place? Jets don't fly that close to buildings that they are attacking, much less gigantic moving monsters with reach. They have these things called missiles that can lock on from twenty miles away. Sure, we see them using cannons in the movie trailer, but those things still have a range of several miles. I get that this is a movie about giant robots and giant monsters, but this isn't a complaint about lack of realism, it's a complaint about lack of common sense. Same reason why Prometheus was absolutely terrible. I like Idris Elba and all, but he couldn't save that garbage, and I don't think he can save this one.
You're complaining about about jets not flying realistically in a movie about GIANT ROBOTS fighting MONSTERS FROM ANOTHER DIMENSION!?
Ok, let's do it your way. Monsters show up, airplanes shoot missiles at them from 20 miles away without ever being in visual range, monsters die, roll credits.
Yeah, I'll totally pay $15 to see that in 3D.
Oh wait, screw that, I want to see a giant robot rocket punching a fucking monster in the face. Yeah, let's go with that one.
On December 13 2012 13:50 Warlock40 wrote: I guess this was supposed to be an homage to Gundam and Godzilla, but it looks more like a terrible Battleship/Transformers mashup. At least it has Guillermo del Toro and pretty explosions. Although as expected for this genre, many of the explosions make no sense whatsoever, like the fighter jet blowing up at 0:41.
huh?
the monster takes a swipe at the jet
Why is the jet even there in the first place? Jets don't fly that close to buildings that they are attacking, much less gigantic moving monsters with reach. They have these things called missiles that can lock on from twenty miles away. Sure, we see them using cannons in the movie trailer, but those things still have a range of several miles. I get that this is a movie about giant robots and giant monsters, but this isn't a complaint about lack of realism, it's a complaint about lack of common sense. Same reason why Prometheus was absolutely terrible. I like Idris Elba and all, but he couldn't save that garbage, and I don't think he can save this one.
You're complaining about about jets not flying realistically in a movie about GIANT ROBOTS fighting MONSTERS FROM ANOTHER DIMENSION!?
Ok, let's do it your way. Monsters show up, airplanes shoot missiles at them from 20 miles away without ever being in visual range, monsters die, roll credits.
Yeah, I'll totally pay $15 to see that in 3D.
Oh wait, screw that, I want to see a giant robot rocket punching a fucking monster in the face. Yeah, let's go with that one.
As long as a movie has a overall consistent tone it's fine, I take issue with military hardware circle jerking and realistic depiction and glamourizing of the modern military operations taking up the same space as giant robots punching a monster in the face. Either go one way or the other. Imagine if in SC2 the terran bio upgrades were replaced with "M16 Assault rifle barrel upgrade" and "Special forces team tactical maneuvering procedure" just to market it towards the American audience, it would be terrible. Movies like "Top Gun" and "Godzilla" shouldn't mix, because when they do you get "Transformers 2".
On December 13 2012 13:50 Warlock40 wrote: I guess this was supposed to be an homage to Gundam and Godzilla, but it looks more like a terrible Battleship/Transformers mashup. At least it has Guillermo del Toro and pretty explosions. Although as expected for this genre, many of the explosions make no sense whatsoever, like the fighter jet blowing up at 0:41.
huh?
the monster takes a swipe at the jet
Why is the jet even there in the first place? Jets don't fly that close to buildings that they are attacking, much less gigantic moving monsters with reach. They have these things called missiles that can lock on from twenty miles away. Sure, we see them using cannons in the movie trailer, but those things still have a range of several miles. I get that this is a movie about giant robots and giant monsters, but this isn't a complaint about lack of realism, it's a complaint about lack of common sense. Same reason why Prometheus was absolutely terrible. I like Idris Elba and all, but he couldn't save that garbage, and I don't think he can save this one.
I don't know why people even bother to make posts like these.
On December 13 2012 13:50 Warlock40 wrote: I guess this was supposed to be an homage to Gundam and Godzilla, but it looks more like a terrible Battleship/Transformers mashup. At least it has Guillermo del Toro and pretty explosions. Although as expected for this genre, many of the explosions make no sense whatsoever, like the fighter jet blowing up at 0:41.
huh?
the monster takes a swipe at the jet
Why is the jet even there in the first place? Jets don't fly that close to buildings that they are attacking, much less gigantic moving monsters with reach. They have these things called missiles that can lock on from twenty miles away. Sure, we see them using cannons in the movie trailer, but those things still have a range of several miles. I get that this is a movie about giant robots and giant monsters, but this isn't a complaint about lack of realism, it's a complaint about lack of common sense. Same reason why Prometheus was absolutely terrible. I like Idris Elba and all, but he couldn't save that garbage, and I don't think he can save this one.
You're complaining about about jets not flying realistically in a movie about GIANT ROBOTS fighting MONSTERS FROM ANOTHER DIMENSION!?
Ok, let's do it your way. Monsters show up, airplanes shoot missiles at them from 20 miles away without ever being in visual range, monsters die, roll credits.
Yeah, I'll totally pay $15 to see that in 3D.
Oh wait, screw that, I want to see a giant robot rocket punching a fucking monster in the face. Yeah, let's go with that one.
I explicitly said that I'm not complaining about the lack of realism. I explicitly said that I understood that this was a movie about giant robots fighting giant monsters. That's no excuse for stupidity.
I guess we don't know enough about this movie yet to understand why they need to make giant robots instead of using regular military stuff, but I'm guessing that somehow, explosives don't work against these monsters. So "my way" would be have the jets fire their missiles, they don't do enough damage, there we go. Plot explained, time for plan B: giant robots. You get to see your giant robot rocket punching, and it would make sense why there is a giant robot rocket punching rather than just being a giant robot rocket punching for the sake of being a giant robot rocket punching.
And I would never pay 15 bucks to see any movie, especially not in garbage 3D. 5 dollar matinee 2D for the win.
I don't know why people even bother to make posts like these.
Because some people find it annoying whenever characters split up in a dangerous situation, or refuse to shoot the obviously infected friend, or go it alone even though they can call for backup at any time.
On December 13 2012 13:50 Warlock40 wrote: I guess this was supposed to be an homage to Gundam and Godzilla, but it looks more like a terrible Battleship/Transformers mashup. At least it has Guillermo del Toro and pretty explosions. Although as expected for this genre, many of the explosions make no sense whatsoever, like the fighter jet blowing up at 0:41.
huh?
the monster takes a swipe at the jet
Why is the jet even there in the first place? Jets don't fly that close to buildings that they are attacking, much less gigantic moving monsters with reach. They have these things called missiles that can lock on from twenty miles away. Sure, we see them using cannons in the movie trailer, but those things still have a range of several miles. I get that this is a movie about giant robots and giant monsters, but this isn't a complaint about lack of realism, it's a complaint about lack of common sense. Same reason why Prometheus was absolutely terrible. I like Idris Elba and all, but he couldn't save that garbage, and I don't think he can save this one.
You know what also doesn't make sense? Bipedal robots that huge - they cannot be physically possible. However, this can be put aside because it is fucking metal to see a giant robot hit godzilla with a rocket-boosted punch. And that IS the point of the movie. IMO, the problem with transformers was that it focused too much on boring humans and stupid side-plots, and a lot of the action scenes were hard to follow. What it should have been, and I think probably 90% of the people who saw it wanted was robots beating the shit out of each other for an hour and a half with one-liners here and there.
This movie isn't supposed to be art. It's supposed to be ridiculous, over the top fun. Before asking "did that make sense" you should be asking "was that fucking sweet?"
This movie is a hybrid of super robots and kaiju. So it's basically this:
On December 13 2012 13:50 Warlock40 wrote: I guess this was supposed to be an homage to Gundam and Godzilla, but it looks more like a terrible Battleship/Transformers mashup. At least it has Guillermo del Toro and pretty explosions. Although as expected for this genre, many of the explosions make no sense whatsoever, like the fighter jet blowing up at 0:41.
huh?
the monster takes a swipe at the jet
Why is the jet even there in the first place? Jets don't fly that close to buildings that they are attacking, much less gigantic moving monsters with reach. They have these things called missiles that can lock on from twenty miles away. Sure, we see them using cannons in the movie trailer, but those things still have a range of several miles. I get that this is a movie about giant robots and giant monsters, but this isn't a complaint about lack of realism, it's a complaint about lack of common sense. Same reason why Prometheus was absolutely terrible. I like Idris Elba and all, but he couldn't save that garbage, and I don't think he can save this one.
You're complaining about about jets not flying realistically in a movie about GIANT ROBOTS fighting MONSTERS FROM ANOTHER DIMENSION!?
Ok, let's do it your way. Monsters show up, airplanes shoot missiles at them from 20 miles away without ever being in visual range, monsters die, roll credits.
Yeah, I'll totally pay $15 to see that in 3D.
Oh wait, screw that, I want to see a giant robot rocket punching a fucking monster in the face. Yeah, let's go with that one.
I explicitly said that I'm not complaining about the lack of realism. I explicitly said that I understood that this was a movie about giant robots fighting giant monsters. That's no excuse for stupidity.
I guess we don't know enough about this movie yet to understand why they need to make giant robots instead of using regular military stuff, but I'm guessing that somehow, explosives don't work against these monsters. So "my way" would be have the jets fire their missiles, they don't do enough damage, there we go. Plot explained, time for plan B: giant robots. You get to see your giant robot rocket punching, and it would make sense why there is a giant robot rocket punching rather than just being a giant robot rocket punching for the sake of being a giant robot rocket punching.
And I would never pay 15 bucks to see any movie, especially not in garbage 3D. 5 dollar matinee 2D for the win.
I don't know why people even bother to make posts like these.
Because some people find it annoying whenever characters split up in a dangerous situation, or refuse to shoot the obviously infected friend, or go it alone even though they can call for backup at any time.
If a movie was based on common sense it would of been over in matter of mins. Ask yourself this if you're planning to make alot of money from a movie would you based it on common sense or extend it as much as possible? You clearly don't know the business aspect of movies.
Bipedal robots that huge - they cannot be physically possible.
This is acceptable within the logic of the movie, which I suppose will be explained in the movie itself. That's how sci-fi / fantasy works. You suspend your disbelief enough to accept that there are things that couldn't happen in real life, but that they can happen in this sci-fi / fantasy world because of so-and-so. ("Thank goodness we invented the blablabla!") As long as everything is consistent within the framework of this world, you can continue to suspend your disbelief.
This movie isn't supposed to be art. It's supposed to be ridiculous, over the top fun. Before asking "did that make sense" you should be asking "was that fucking sweet?"
Why do people always think that you can't have both? Because you can. Look at Tarantino's movies. Look at del Toro's movies, for crying out loud.
If a movie was based on common sense it would of been over in matter of mins.
You can have plot developments that don't rely on absolute stupidity. Developments that make sense within the internal logic of the film. Look at The Cabin in the Woods. Look at The Avengers, or even (parts of) Avatar. There were explanations for why the aliens at a severe technological disadvantage were able to fend off an advanced military force. And so on.
Ask yourself this if you're planning to make alot of money from a movie would you based it on common sense or extend it as much as possible? You clearly don't know the business aspect of movies.
If I wanted to make a lot of money from a movie, I would only greenlight a script if it was good. Good being high on entertainment, low on stupidity, or just enough of a balance so that the amount of crowd cheering exceeds the amount of eye-rolling. Yes, common sense will always suffer, but as long as the entertainment factor outweighs it, this will be justified. This movie might very well be good. And if it is, stupid kamikaze jet scene won't matter. In fact, I might even find it to be an awesome action scene. I simply regret the unnecessary lapse of common sense in this scene.
How people focus so much on "bad writing" when the all we have seen is a 2 minute trailer. Its not like they will spend trailer time explaining the story.
Bipedal robots that huge - they cannot be physically possible.
This is acceptable within the logic of the movie, which I suppose will be explained in the movie itself. That's how sci-fi / fantasy works. You suspend your disbelief enough to accept that there are things that couldn't happen in real life, but that they can happen in this sci-fi / fantasy world because of so-and-so. ("Thank goodness we invented the blablabla!") As long as everything is consistent within the framework of this world, you can continue to suspend your disbelief.
This movie isn't supposed to be art. It's supposed to be ridiculous, over the top fun. Before asking "did that make sense" you should be asking "was that fucking sweet?"
Why do people always think that you can't have both? Because you can. Look at Tarantino's movies. Look at del Toro's movies, for crying out loud.
If a movie was based on common sense it would of been over in matter of mins.
You can have plot developments that don't rely on absolute stupidity. Developments that make sense within the internal logic of the film. Look at The Cabin in the Woods. Look at The Avengers, or even (parts of) Avatar. There were explanations for why the aliens at a severe technological disadvantage were able to fend off an advanced military force. And so on.
Ask yourself this if you're planning to make alot of money from a movie would you based it on common sense or extend it as much as possible? You clearly don't know the business aspect of movies.
If I wanted to make a lot of money from a movie, I would only greenlight a script if it was good. Good being high on entertainment, low on stupidity, or just enough of a balance so that the amount of crowd cheering exceeds the amount of eye-rolling. Yes, common sense will always suffer, but as long as the entertainment factor outweighs it, this will be justified. This movie might very well be good. And if it is, stupid kamikaze jet scene won't matter. In fact, I might even find it to be an awesome action scene. I simply regret the unnecessary lapse of common sense in this scene.
Wait, so this trailer offends your common sense, while Avatar didn't?
Bipedal robots that huge - they cannot be physically possible.
This is acceptable within the logic of the movie, which I suppose will be explained in the movie itself. That's how sci-fi / fantasy works. You suspend your disbelief enough to accept that there are things that couldn't happen in real life, but that they can happen in this sci-fi / fantasy world because of so-and-so. ("Thank goodness we invented the blablabla!") As long as everything is consistent within the framework of this world, you can continue to suspend your disbelief.
This movie isn't supposed to be art. It's supposed to be ridiculous, over the top fun. Before asking "did that make sense" you should be asking "was that fucking sweet?"
Why do people always think that you can't have both? Because you can. Look at Tarantino's movies. Look at del Toro's movies, for crying out loud.
If a movie was based on common sense it would of been over in matter of mins.
You can have plot developments that don't rely on absolute stupidity. Developments that make sense within the internal logic of the film. Look at The Cabin in the Woods. Look at The Avengers, or even (parts of) Avatar. There were explanations for why the aliens at a severe technological disadvantage were able to fend off an advanced military force. And so on.
Ask yourself this if you're planning to make alot of money from a movie would you based it on common sense or extend it as much as possible? You clearly don't know the business aspect of movies.
If I wanted to make a lot of money from a movie, I would only greenlight a script if it was good. Good being high on entertainment, low on stupidity, or just enough of a balance so that the amount of crowd cheering exceeds the amount of eye-rolling. Yes, common sense will always suffer, but as long as the entertainment factor outweighs it, this will be justified. This movie might very well be good. And if it is, stupid kamikaze jet scene won't matter. In fact, I might even find it to be an awesome action scene. I simply regret the unnecessary lapse of common sense in this scene.
For what it's worth, I agree. Hopefully that particular moment is just a lapse of judgement and not fully indicative of the rest of the movie. Unplugging your brain to enjoy some mindless monster-bashing can be fun, but if the plot/writing isn't completely horrible it can be so much more enjoyable. I enjoyed the first Transformers movie, but it would have been one of my all time favorites with less horrible writing.
I'm slightly bothered by the premise that each robot requires two pilots to work. It feels like they're trying to shoehorn in a "we hate each other but have to work together, and in the end we fall in love/gain respect for one another" subplot that's going to be boring and predictable. I mean, all it is is two pilots doing the same motions in the cockpit, it seems really silly unless there's a pseudo-bullshit-pseudo-science reason behind it.
EPT
