open All Channels
seplocked Out of Pod Experience
blankseplocked You sunk my battleship !
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Nimrod Nemesis
Amarr
Royal Amarr Institute
Posted - 2011.08.03 02:20:00 - [31]
 

Edited by: Nimrod Nemesis on 03/08/2011 02:21:07
Originally by: Wendat Huron
Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis
Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis

Three words: Cowboys and Aliens.


Quoting myself to say, this was a pretty good movie for such an odd premise. Not an award winner (I hope), but worth dow.. i mean, seeing.


No it really wasn't. What did it have to make it good? Great aliens, magnificient scenery, good acting, amazing action? It had none of that, it was mediocre across the board.

It's yet another Suckerpunch where Hollywood throws together a couple of interesting tidbits and watch to see what sticks, sorta like what you did as a kid, the industry is regressing.


I think I was pretty explicit about it not being an award winner, but to put it on the level of all the latest cgi snuff-films is not fair imo. The plot is thread-bare, but the actors don't suck, and the character development isn't forced down your throat/stupid although it comes out weak because of this. Overally i'd give it 5-6/10. You get what's on the tin: A gritty western with some aliens.

But I do agree, the industry is in the pits right now. Probably due to the fact that Transformers continued to draw sales despite the fact it featured bad plots and worse acting. I think it's safe to say we're not getting another real piece of good film from hollywood until Michal Bay dies.

Deviana Sevidon
Gallente
Panta-Rhei
Butterfly Effect Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.03 13:57:00 - [32]
 

Please do not forget Tetris the Movie

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.08.06 03:52:00 - [33]
 

On the other hand, Transformers at the movies (which now kind of suck), My Little Pony (which now rules) and also Thundercats (yes, they're back).
It's almost like we're back in the '80s, but in Bizarro land Laughing

Ophelia Payne
Posted - 2011.08.06 03:57:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Akita T
On the other hand, Transformers at the movies (which now kind of suck), My Little Pony (which now rules) and also Thundercats (yes, they're back).
It's almost like we're back in the '80s, but in Bizarro land Laughing


and the Smurfs, don't forget the Smurfs who now have their own 2 hour and 50 minute movie Shocked

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.06 06:26:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Akita T
On the other hand, Transformers at the movies (which now kind of suck), My Little Pony (which now rules) and also Thundercats (yes, they're back).
It's almost like we're back in the '80s, but in Bizarro land Laughing


If Hollywood is busy rehashing the 80s, then maybe they can be bothered to create a Highlander sequel?


Komen
Gallente
Capital Enrichment Services
Posted - 2011.08.06 16:35:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Akita T
On the other hand, Transformers at the movies (which now kind of suck), My Little Pony (which now rules) and also Thundercats (yes, they're back).
It's almost like we're back in the '80s, but in Bizarro land Laughing


If Hollywood is busy rehashing the 80s, then maybe they can be bothered to create a Highlander sequel?




**** you to death with your own genitals. God no. Leave the damn thing alone, and go create something new.

M'ktakh
Posted - 2011.08.06 17:17:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux

If Hollywood is busy rehashing the 80s, then maybe they can be bothered to create a Highlander sequel?




I hate you.

Jon Taggart
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.08.06 17:35:00 - [38]
 

Do we even field Battleships anymore? I thought they were retired.

Vicker Lahn'se
Minmatar
STRAG3S
Posted - 2011.08.07 06:37:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Jon Taggart
Do we even field Battleships anymore? I thought they were retired.


Yeah, I'm not exactly a military expert, but I think it's all aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, and patrol boats now.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.07 07:02:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Komen
Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Akita T
On the other hand, Transformers at the movies (which now kind of suck), My Little Pony (which now rules) and also Thundercats (yes, they're back).
It's almost like we're back in the '80s, but in Bizarro land Laughing


If Hollywood is busy rehashing the 80s, then maybe they can be bothered to create a Highlander sequel?




**** you to death with your own genitals. God no. Leave the damn thing alone, and go create something new.


Oh come on! It's been over two decades and they have yet to make Highlander II. Probably have to be a prequel though, for obvious reasons.


Ophelia Payne
Posted - 2011.08.07 07:49:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Komen
Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Akita T
On the other hand, Transformers at the movies (which now kind of suck), My Little Pony (which now rules) and also Thundercats (yes, they're back).
It's almost like we're back in the '80s, but in Bizarro land Laughing


If Hollywood is busy rehashing the 80s, then maybe they can be bothered to create a Highlander sequel?




**** you to death with your own genitals. God no. Leave the damn thing alone, and go create something new.


Oh come on! It's been over two decades and they have yet to make Highlander II. Probably have to be a prequel though, for obvious reasons.




Directed by Uwe Boll and have a starring roll for Michelle Rodriguez and Ben Affleck

baltec1
Posted - 2011.08.07 08:03:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Ophelia Payne
Originally by: Akita T
On the other hand, Transformers at the movies (which now kind of suck), My Little Pony (which now rules) and also Thundercats (yes, they're back).
It's almost like we're back in the '80s, but in Bizarro land Laughing


and the Smurfs, don't forget the Smurfs who now have their own 2 hour and 50 minute movie Shocked


And in 3D no less...

Iggy Stooge
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.08.07 08:22:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Komen
Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Akita T
On the other hand, Transformers at the movies (which now kind of suck), My Little Pony (which now rules) and also Thundercats (yes, they're back).
It's almost like we're back in the '80s, but in Bizarro land Laughing


If Hollywood is busy rehashing the 80s, then maybe they can be bothered to create a Highlander sequel?




**** you to death with your own genitals. God no. Leave the damn thing alone, and go create something new.


Oh come on! It's been over two decades and they have yet to make Highlander II. Probably have to be a prequel though, for obvious reasons.




There have already been 6 Highlander films, and a TV series. And all of them were crap

Grimpak
Gallente
Midnight Elites
Echelon Rising
Posted - 2011.08.07 10:47:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Vicker Lahn'se
Originally by: Jon Taggart
Do we even field Battleships anymore? I thought they were retired.


Yeah, I'm not exactly a military expert, but I think it's all aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, and patrol boats now.
they might return when the navy gets working railguns thoRazz

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.08 04:53:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Iggy Stooge


There have already been 6 Highlander films, and a TV series. And all of them were crap


No. There has only been the one and only Highlander film. *twitch*

The TV series is simply an alternate universe Hollywood spin-off and doesn't count.


Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.08.08 08:14:00 - [46]
 

Yeah, just like that old "Matrix" movie. Wonder why they never made any sequels. No, sir, there have been no sequels to that.

Iggy Stooge
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.08.08 08:19:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Iggy Stooge


There have already been 6 Highlander films, and a TV series. And all of them were crap


No. There has only been the one and only Highlander film. *twitch*

The TV series is simply an alternate universe Hollywood spin-off and doesn't count.




Highlander 11 I can't be bothered to link the rest.

Royaldo
Gallente
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch.
Sev3rance
Posted - 2011.08.08 09:10:00 - [48]
 

I watched highlander 1 few years ago. Completely forgotten just how much Queen theres in it. Also Lambert is horrible.

Battleship the movie.. Someone wake me up, this dream is becoming ******ed.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.08.08 10:01:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Iggy Stooge
stuff

Duuuuuude, your sarcasm//denial detector is broken.

Royaldo
Gallente
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch.
Sev3rance
Posted - 2011.08.08 10:17:00 - [50]
 

WAIT WHAT?!?! WHY BATTLESHIP!?!?!

...........................i cant remember the last really good movie i saw tbh. Like just after the credits started to roll i wanted to see it again.


Iggy Stooge
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.08.08 15:12:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Iggy Stooge
stuff

Duuuuuude, your sarcasm//denial detector is broken.


Look, you started this stupid thread, what did you expect, intelligent replies?

baltec1
Posted - 2011.08.08 17:10:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Iggy Stooge
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Iggy Stooge
stuff

Duuuuuude, your sarcasm//denial detector is broken.


Look, you started this stupid thread, what did you expect, intelligent replies?



Much anger in this one.

Aus Mote
Gallente
Project Sinkhole Command
Posted - 2011.08.08 20:27:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Grimpak
Originally by: Vicker Lahn'se
Originally by: Jon Taggart
Do we even field Battleships anymore? I thought they were retired.


Yeah, I'm not exactly a military expert, but I think it's all aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, and patrol boats now.
they might return when the navy gets working railguns thoRazz


I dunno, I thought part of the reason battleships were phased out was because of their immobility (besides being easily overwhelmed by aircraft). Arguably aircraft carriers are pretty immobile too, but at least they have a larger effective range than battleships. I guess their return would depend on the range of the railguns and how cheap they are, otherwise people will probably stick with aircraft and missiles.

Though a railgun-based battleship would be ****ing awesome! Razz

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.08 22:41:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: Aus Mote

I dunno, I thought part of the reason battleships were phased out was because of their immobility (besides being easily overwhelmed by aircraft). Arguably aircraft carriers are pretty immobile too, but at least they have a larger effective range than battleships. I guess their return would depend on the range of the railguns and how cheap they are, otherwise people will probably stick with aircraft and missiles.

Though a railgun-based battleship would be ****ing awesome! Razz


Nuclear powered aircraft carriers are some of the fastest warships out there.

It's all about force projection. A battleship's main guns can send a ton of explosives out to 20 to 26 miles. (Basically the range of the horizon.) (I don't think rocket assisted shells ever made it to the light of day.) By comparison, a carrier's planes can drop tons of ordinance hundreds of miles away.

Tomahawk cruise missiles make a battleship useful, but you don't need a battleship to carry Tomahawks. Heck, they can be launched from subs.

Railguns should have a range of a hundred+ miles and be able to hit a target faster than a missile or plane can.

I doubt that we'll see battleships make a comeback even with railguns. They're too expensive and nowadays you probably want several ships instead of one very big target.


Aus Mote
Gallente
Project Sinkhole Command
Posted - 2011.08.08 23:54:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux

Nuclear powered aircraft carriers are some of the fastest warships out there.



I wondered if I had gotten something backwards.

Quote:

It's all about force projection. A battleship's main guns can send a ton of explosives out to 20 to 26 miles. (Basically the range of the horizon.) (I don't think rocket assisted shells ever made it to the light of day.) By comparison, a carrier's planes can drop tons of ordinance hundreds of miles away.

Tomahawk cruise missiles make a battleship useful, but you don't need a battleship to carry Tomahawks. Heck, they can be launched from subs.

Railguns should have a range of a hundred+ miles and be able to hit a target faster than a missile or plane can.

I doubt that we'll see battleships make a comeback even with railguns. They're too expensive and nowadays you probably want several ships instead of one very big target.




Your last point makes sense. If there were a few large ships with a lot of firepower each, then destroying just one would impact the entire fleet severely, whereas having smaller ships with less firepower each but the combined firepower of one large ship would allow one to be destroyed and not impact the fleet's damage-dealing capabilities too severely. Plus smaller ships = smaller targets.

If only someone can actually make a railgun that doesn't warp itself after a few rounds, then we can see what Navies worldwide actually plan to do with the tech.

Ophelia Payne
Posted - 2011.08.09 03:53:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Aus Mote

If only someone can actually make a railgun that doesn't warp itself after a few rounds, then we can see what Navies worldwide actually plan to do with the tech.


The best weapon is one you only have to fire once Wink

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.08.10 04:27:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Ophelia Payne
Originally by: Aus Mote
If only someone can actually make a railgun that doesn't warp itself after a few rounds, then we can see what Navies worldwide actually plan to do with the tech.

The best weapon is one you only have to fire once Wink

And here I was thinking the best weapon is the one you don't have to fire at all (see:nukes) Twisted Evil


Pages: 1 [2]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only