quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Do you know something that we dont?

No, I didn't notice that Minaya had posted as well. Yes it's a monster/alien movie from J.J. Abrams, but it has nothing to with Cloverfield and it's certainly not E.T.

___________________

certainly not Cloverfield related, because there's a separate ongoing project going on for a Cloverfield 2. but 'Super 8' does look somewhat interesting. don't want to put too much judgment into it since it's only 1 trailer, and it didn't really reveal much other than the pre-plot.

___________________

I enjoyed the promotional campaign for Cloverfield much more than the actual movie. I hope he does something similar this time, and it looks like he's setting himself up to.

quote:

Originally posted by bas No, I didn't notice that Minaya had posted as well. Yes it's a monster/alien movie from J.J. Abrams, but it has nothing to with Cloverfield and it's certainly not E.T.

I thought it was the first movie in a trilogy about a cheesy trance duo:

part 1: Super 8
part 2: Tab
part 3: Super 8 & Tab make crowds go "zomfg \o/ CHOON"

___________________
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate

No amounts of weed nor pure MDMA would of altered my disgust and disappointment when I watched this movie.

Acting- So vividly original to the point where "character development" is defined as acting itself.

Plot- Eh, same old Holly stuff. Written to advocate the story but yet make it simple for the sake of today's entertainment perception.

Directing- Simple, simple, simple directing.

quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Stalin LOL if you thought Ironman 2 was going to be some profound game changing movie that revolutionizes movie making. It's a comic book action film FFS......it did exactly what it was supposed to do. Entertain.

Exactly.

I found to be as entertaining as the first one.

Although this felt more like a bridge for Marvel to start connecting The Avengers together, not so much a stand alone Iron Man film.

I thought Roger Sterling as Tony's Dad was genius casting too. Albeit a super weak final standoff with Rourke at the end (Seriously the main villain gets a less than 2 minute fight scene with Tony/Rhoads. What the hell?) I found it to serve the purpose that the first one did.

A lot of my friends were complaining about this one but I always felt like they overhyped the first one to begin with. It was a great movie but it didn't break any new ground or anything.

___________________
Progressive Transmission Tracklist Archive (Nomad in The Dark, Kristina Sky, Darin Epsilon and more!)
Facebook.com/Minaya
Upcoming Gigs
7.9 - La Cave w/ Harmonik
7.11 - Wayfarer Grand Opening
7.25 - House of Dreamz @ Yost Theater
7.31 - Zed's Dead @ The Observatory

quote:

Originally posted by Dj Minaya Although this felt more like a bridge for Marvel to start connecting The Avengers together, not so much a stand alone Iron Man film.

Pretty much. It wasn't terrible, but certainly lacking in the character development department. I mean, if they had played Tony all along as the alcoholic that he is, it would have made more sense when Rhodes took over as War Machine. One out of control party scene is sort of a cheap cop out, but w/e. I also think Don Cheadle is too soft to be War Machine...I much preferred Terrence Howard.

I did particularly like the scene with the reporter that Tony banged from the first flick though. Lol.