His next bad guy should be based off Jack Abramoff. ;)

I'm watching the original Star Wars, not the prequels where Darth Vader's a whiny bitch. :p

Tell me this isn't the first time you've seen the original trilogy and that you didn't see the prequels before you saw the originals.

I've seen the original trilogy before. The only thing good about the prequels was Ewan McGregor as Obi Wan Kenobi.

I've been watching the CGI Clone Wars series and damn it is some fine piece of story telling. I don't know how much George Lucas was involved, but thank god not much in the story department.

Seriously, the 3 seasons so far and 4th season coming this fall made me really like the prequel story and makes the movies terrible pieces of work than they already are. The 2008 movie that started the CGI series started me on this. Within a few episodes, they made Anakin Skywalker, a man in the prequels this whining bitch of a man who you just hate...is a well developed, well rounded and likable guy. Seriously, they actually made Anakin Skywalker a GOOD character in the series. He's a competent leader, a Jedi master training a padawan, he's respected by his Jedi peers, not some whining, bitching douche and the hints of the dark side seeping in are actually subtle! Goes to show you want a series of episodes can do to the prequel stories more than the movies will ever do.

I feel so silly saying this but Cad Bane was a pretty good character.

I was kind of against the CGI Clone Wars series at first, because the original Clone Wars series was so good, but I've watched every episode so far, and it's won me over. The writers have done their homework, and whoever is doing animated Anakin is much better than Hayden Christiansen doing live-action Anakin.

Finally watched Last Starfighter tonight. Given how far video games have come since 1984, it deserves a remake.

I know. There's an episode where we explore his dark side and he confronts a scary ghost of his dead mom and it's such a better scene.

I keep wondering how they're going to explain Ahsoka away when the show ends.

I saw The Lincoln Lawyer today. It was really good and it proves that Matthew McCanaughey can actually act.

http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment...placement.html

To summarize, the next Bond movie will have $45 million of product placement in it. I think Walther is paying something, or at least there's a business relationship, as only Walther guns in the Qos game had proper names, but since MGM is so short on cash, do you think they'd be open to someone swooping in and offering more money? Can we see Bond carrying an HK or FN in the next movie?

Ian Fleming out product placement heavily in his books, so it will be relevant.

But did Fleming ever get paid for that? And the product placement gets a little ridiculous at times. Really, a car crashing into a Heineken truck? Bond driving a four door BMW? Bond having a BMW coupe with no gadgets waiting for him in Cuba?

If BMW could swoop in and get the car product placement over Aston Martin, I'm surprised no one has gone in for the pistol. It's the only piece of equipment Bond has had in EVERY movie.

I can't believe "Fast Five" made so much money at the box office last weekend (actually surpassing the least conservative estimates of ticket-counters as well as the studio). I thought that when "Fast & Furious" did well, that was a fluke. Clearly, I am wrong.

What's even more ridiculous is that the franchise itself is 10 years old. I never would have thought that a franchise which appealed to teenagers of my generation would still have appeal another decade later. Obviously, there are lots of franchises in Hollywood that have lasted this long or longer, but usually not those which are directed only at teenagers and have little obvious cross-generation appeal. So what the fuck is it that Justin Lin, Vin Diesel, and Paul Walker (and now The Rock, too) know about franchise longevity that I don't?

If I recall, won't that be something like twice the amount that was in the next biggest movie for product placement? Are we going to have Bond doing something like that shoe scene in I, Robot?

'Pay attention, 007, this is your fantastic Rolex watch. It features an accurately balanced action that keeps perfect time, guaranteed.'

'What does it do, Q?'

'It's a Rolex watch, I just told you. Now remember you have to stop off at Subway, White Castle, McDonald's, at least two Starbucks and Wal-Mart on the way to stopping Adolf Badmann detonating the nuclear weapon he bought from Sharper Image.'

'I hate this job.'

'Then you can apply for agency work at Manpower.'

He did correct Vesper in CR and refer to his watch as an Omega.

(BTW, he pronounced it O-Mee-ga. Is that the proper way to pronounce it? Is it like Rodeo Drive and Houston Street, it isn't pronounced the normal way?)

It's a secret that people will do anything to know (you heard nothing from me).
:D *





*This means I am joking.

Might just be British English, you hear people say it oh-me-ga and oh-may-ga over here.

It's a simple formula for simple people. Fast cars crashing into each other (Transformers, Bad Boys, The Transporter) + criminals looking cool breaking the law (Scarface, The Boondock Saints, The Transporter (again) ). Plot, character development, (and sometimes even big name stars) are not required at all.

Bill Simmons and Adam Carolla did a whole 72 minute podcast on it. Apparently, it falls in the so bad it's good category.

As much as that might sound like the obvious answer, if those are really the only elements that have kept the "Fast and the Furious" franchise going, then the movies are still pretty much interchangeable with countless others of the last 10 years. In which case, they'd have trouble staying afloat and visible in a sea of competing films/franchises. There's clearly something else that we're both missing here.

I looked it up, and apparently, it IS just a British thing.

I think it's the false sense of nostalgia to the series at this point. It's been running almost 10 years, that's a pretty simple way to trick people into seeing quality in it.

That and what turned out to be a pretty effective system for the series, being the next two sequels (2Fast2Furious and The Tokyo Drift) were poorly made and dropped many of the lead actors that made the first movie above "God awful" status. By bringing back all the original actors to the 4th, and even adding The Rock to the 5th, they made the fans feel that these HAD to be better than the two that dropped the cast, and that "bringing back the old gang" again, gave it some minor nostalgia points.

If all that's too deep though, we live in America, where a film that consists of tits, ass, cars, guns, and deemed attractive B-list actors is all that people are looking for. Not many film scholars these days, too many of today's teenagers want to get wasted/blazed and watch boobs bounce and shit blow up for two hours.

Not just teenagers. I enjoy that shit too (in moderation). It's just that there are many better options for me than the "Fast and the Furious" franchise. So why choose this one?

Your theory about nostalgia makes sense; it's just that many of the kids seeing "Fast Five" today (the 12- to 18-year olds) are too young to remember the original, and therefore to be nostalgic. When franchises endure for 10+ years, there's usually something cross-generational about them. I can't figure out what it is about this particular franchise, and it certainly isn't cars, hotties, and guns alone. Is it Vin Diesel? Or Paul Walker? (both of whom were pretty much has-beens when "Fast & Furious" came out) Or is it just seeing Vin Diesel and Paul Walker drive fast cars?

That being said, this particular movie actually got decent reviews (68, or "Generally Favorable" on Metacritic). Though I doubt that would make a difference one way or the other.

Any question I ask, Cracked has already figured out. Silly me. Well, here's their take:

http://www.cracked.com/funny-2155-fast-furious/

I was thinking of that very article as this topic came up. haha.

I'm pissed at Cracked, their recent photoplasty contest had the premise "If classic movie scenes were ruined by product placement", and I had a picture ready to submit, and I'd been blocked from the forum. I've posted ONCE and nothing bad. My record has 6 posts, and I've been labeled a "Craption Cheat", so I guess I was hacked or something, especially because I don't even look at craptions. I've gotten no response from the site on it though, which is kinda frustrating.

My picture, even though it's irrelevant to this thread, was Juno on her hamburger phone, holding a box of Trojan Ecstacy condoms. Far from a classic movie, or the best idea, but it's the effort that matters dammit. :mad:

didnt you do an article for them?

Like what?

I think you overestimate how much it takes to grab people's attention.

You are the minority. You are not the lowest common denominator.

I remember seeing The Two Towers with my friend's family. His 8 year old nephew was there and was just as excited to see it as we were. He hadn't read the books, he probably didn't even know they were books to begin with. All he knew is that he was going to see some fantasy violence and magical beasts, story telling motifs that have appealed to the masses since before forever. In this case, yes it is just the cars. You don't need to see the first four movies to understand what's happening in the fifth one.

Yes, this one:
http://www.cracked.com/funny-2939-to...ll-ninja-guns/
God it's hardly even relevant to current topics anymore. :o

Technically it's a topic though, not an article. Usually topics discuss a single issue (like the Fast & Furious one Matt just posted), but I used it to write an article.

Since attempts to get future legitimate articles approved ended in being shot down multiple times, I say to hell with them, you don't need approval to make a topic an article and go against the site format. They haven't deleted it in 3 years so they must not care too much.

Ah, fuck it, I think I've been over-analyzing "Fast Five". I guess I'll just have to make due with the fact that American teens enjoy these kinds of movies, and that for two generations of teens, the "Fast and the Furious" franchise has somehow earned a reputation for high-quality cheap thrills that allows the movies to remain so successful.

That being said, I'm still not seeing it in theaters. Maybe Blu Ray/Netflix, though.

If you're going to watch a movie with lots of car chases and explosions, you might as well just watch it in the theater to get the full effect.

I was tempted to go see Top Gun in the theater again this weekend for the same reason.

Top Gun? What, do you have your own theater where you decide what's playing or something?

Theaters show older movies all the time just for the hell of it

AMC had two showings over the weekend to celebrate the 25th anniversary. I was REALLY tempted to go, but I couldn't find anyone to go with.

http://www.amctheatres.com/topgun/

The one in my town doesn't. :(

Growing up, there used to be one in the neighboring town, but I heard it was a super crappy theater. In college, they had an old theater that showed old movies (old as in they actually had an organ). I caught Casablanca there freshman year.

Move somewhere better

This weekend, I going to watch a bunch of episodes of Lost on Netflix Instant.

I'm watching Operation: Endgame on instant watch. It's suprisingly good for a direct-to-video flick