Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Whedon should get "Buffy" back if he succeeds with "The Avengers"
21 views
Skip to first unread message
RichA
Apr 29, 2012, 10:17:47 PM4/29/12
to
And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
movie. We saw a $200M+ piece of fantasy crap DIE at the box office
"John Carter" and "Wrath of the Titans" or whatever that other one was
called didn't do very well either. Now, contrast that with the
reception the CLEARLY R-rated "Spartacus" and "Game of Thrones" have
gotten on TV.
http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whedon-talks-much-ado-about-nothing-and-buffy.html
appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
movie. We saw a $200M+ piece of fantasy crap DIE at the box office
"John Carter" and "Wrath of the Titans" or whatever that other one was
called didn't do very well either. Now, contrast that with the
reception the CLEARLY R-rated "Spartacus" and "Game of Thrones" have
gotten on TV.
http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whedon-talks-much-ado-about-nothing-and-buffy.html
Duggy
Apr 30, 2012, 3:59:35 AM4/30/12
to
Does he want it?
===
= DUG.
===
Marc Espie
Apr 30, 2012, 5:35:51 AM4/30/12
to
nick
Apr 30, 2012, 7:51:24 AM4/30/12
to
On Apr 30, 5:35 am, es...@lain.home (Marc Espie) wrote:
I liked this:
'He tried to instill that same sense of female empowerment into "The
Avengers" via Scarlett Johansson's character. "Joss did not want the
Black Widow to be the damsel in distress or just another pretty face
or a woman who was not capable of holding her own," Johansson says.'
It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
own"?
> In article <046569e0-0fea-4305-a83c-3e77724ce...@t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com>,Duggy <p.allan.dug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 30, 12:17 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
> >> appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
> >> as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
> >> movie. We saw a $200M+ piece of fantasy crap DIE at the box office
> >> "John Carter" and "Wrath of the Titans" or whatever that other one was
> >> called didn't do very well either. Now, contrast that with the
> >> reception the CLEARLY R-rated "Spartacus" and "Game of Thrones" have
> >> gotten on TV.
>
> >>http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
>
> >Does he want it?
>
> Full urlhttp://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
> >On Apr 30, 12:17 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
> >> appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
> >> as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
> >> movie. We saw a $200M+ piece of fantasy crap DIE at the box office
> >> "John Carter" and "Wrath of the Titans" or whatever that other one was
> >> called didn't do very well either. Now, contrast that with the
> >> reception the CLEARLY R-rated "Spartacus" and "Game of Thrones" have
> >> gotten on TV.
>
> >>http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
>
> >Does he want it?
>
I liked this:
'He tried to instill that same sense of female empowerment into "The
Avengers" via Scarlett Johansson's character. "Joss did not want the
Black Widow to be the damsel in distress or just another pretty face
or a woman who was not capable of holding her own," Johansson says.'
It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
own"?
trotsky
Apr 30, 2012, 7:53:48 AM4/30/12
to
On 4/29/12 9:17 PM, RichA wrote:
> And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
> appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
> as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
> movie.
A) What the hell does "A14" mean?
> And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
> appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
> as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
> movie.
B) The only way a Buffy movie would be greenlighted was if 10 or 20
thousand fanboys such as yourself served as executive producers.
trotsky
Apr 30, 2012, 8:21:26 AM4/30/12
to
anim8rFSK
Apr 30, 2012, 9:13:17 AM4/30/12
to
In article
<98650802-8a2e-4bc1...@q13g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
Nope. "Joss wanted to be faithful to how the character has always been
depicted in 40 years of comics and a previous movie" would be a better
statement.
That said ... The Black Widow is all but useless in a fight against Loki
and an army of magical creatures. Of course, so is Hawkeye. Cap's damn
near pointless himself.
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Charlie Sheen?
<98650802-8a2e-4bc1...@q13g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
depicted in 40 years of comics and a previous movie" would be a better
statement.
That said ... The Black Widow is all but useless in a fight against Loki
and an army of magical creatures. Of course, so is Hawkeye. Cap's damn
near pointless himself.
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Charlie Sheen?
RichA
Apr 30, 2012, 9:40:48 AM4/30/12
to
makes $250M worldwide, subtract $110M for costs and promotion, $40,000
payoff. No wonder Hollywood likes the business.
Obveeus
Apr 30, 2012, 9:47:07 AM4/30/12
to
significant gross outside the USA?
moviePig
Apr 30, 2012, 9:57:52 AM4/30/12
to
On Apr 30, 9:47 am, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
Only if there are cultural equivalents to the name 'Buffy' (...which
even in the U.S. has likely already lost some of its derisive
connotation). Without it, you've just got another manufactured Marvel
milieu.
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
even in the U.S. has likely already lost some of its derisive
connotation). Without it, you've just got another manufactured Marvel
milieu.
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
Obveeus
Apr 30, 2012, 10:19:11 AM4/30/12
to
Trek which also struggles to find an overseas film audience...and Buffy
isn't 1/20th the draw of Star Trek in the USA. I think it far more likely
that a Buffy film would gross $25M than $250M.
nick
Apr 30, 2012, 10:51:00 AM4/30/12
to
On Apr 30, 10:19 am, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
than Buffy or Star Trek and look what's about to happen in a couple of
weeks.
> "moviePig" <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 30, 9:47 am, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> $250M worldwide gross? Does 'Buffy' really have any potential for
> >> significant gross outside the USA?
>
> >Only if there are cultural equivalents to the name 'Buffy' (...which
> >even in the U.S. has likely already lost some of its derisive
> >connotation). Without it, you've just got another manufactured Marvel
> >milieu.
>
> I tend to think that Buffy is a very American product, even moreso than Star
> Trek which also struggles to find an overseas film audience...
I bet Dark Shadows the tv series has an overseas audience even smaller
> >On Apr 30, 9:47 am, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> $250M worldwide gross? Does 'Buffy' really have any potential for
> >> significant gross outside the USA?
>
> >Only if there are cultural equivalents to the name 'Buffy' (...which
> >even in the U.S. has likely already lost some of its derisive
> >connotation). Without it, you've just got another manufactured Marvel
> >milieu.
>
> I tend to think that Buffy is a very American product, even moreso than Star
> Trek which also struggles to find an overseas film audience...
than Buffy or Star Trek and look what's about to happen in a couple of
weeks.
anim8rFSK
Apr 30, 2012, 11:08:58 AM4/30/12
to
In article
<e78aa716-712f-415f...@n5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
It's going to come out in the wake of The Avengers and be a flop of
biblical proportions?
BTW, there are NO reviews of DS and it's less than 2 weeks out. That
means they're hiding it.
<e78aa716-712f-415f...@n5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
biblical proportions?
BTW, there are NO reviews of DS and it's less than 2 weeks out. That
means they're hiding it.
Obveeus
Apr 30, 2012, 11:09:19 AM4/30/12
to
trotsky
Apr 30, 2012, 11:13:17 AM4/30/12
to
such a project.
trotsky
Apr 30, 2012, 11:18:42 AM4/30/12
to
Burton-ized?
Mason Barge
Apr 30, 2012, 12:31:41 PM4/30/12
to
going to lose their $3500. Even if the movie grossed $250 million, the
studio would show a loss to the investors.
Even professional movie people are wary of providing outside financing for
studio movies.
Tom
Apr 30, 2012, 2:42:29 PM4/30/12
to
On Apr 30, 11:31 am, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 10:19:11 -0400, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
> studio movies. - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I read an article a few years ago that claimed Tim Burton's BATMAN was
still in the red for Warner Bros.
Tom
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 10:19:11 -0400, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
I read an article a few years ago that claimed Tim Burton's BATMAN was
still in the red for Warner Bros.
Tom
anim8rFSK
Apr 30, 2012, 2:59:48 PM4/30/12
to
In article <jnm9uv$g8s$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com>
wrote:
JINX! You owe me a soda!
wrote:
anim8rFSK
Apr 30, 2012, 3:51:22 PM4/30/12
to
In article <2dftp75dqu8do5o71...@4ax.com>,
I do sometimes think that if I had Bill Gates level money, and my
favorite TV show was on the bubble, I'd just call the network and say
"I'll buy all your ad time for Angel Season 6" ...
favorite TV show was on the bubble, I'd just call the network and say
"I'll buy all your ad time for Angel Season 6" ...
Obveeus
Apr 30, 2012, 3:56:53 PM4/30/12
to
Obveeus
Apr 30, 2012, 3:58:27 PM4/30/12
to
Box Office gross, not 'net income'.
Obveeus
Apr 30, 2012, 4:15:23 PM4/30/12
to
"anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> I do sometimes think that if I had Bill Gates level money, and my
> favorite TV show was on the bubble, I'd just call the network and say
> "I'll buy all your ad time for Angel Season 6" ...
moviePig
Apr 30, 2012, 4:17:11 PM4/30/12
to
On Apr 30, 3:56 pm, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
> "anim8rFSK" <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> > In article <jnm9uv$g8...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com>
> > wrote:
you'll throw the n.g. into time-warp...
> "anim8rFSK" <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> > In article <jnm9uv$g8...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >> "nick" <nickmacpherso...@AOL.com> wrote:
> >> >I bet Dark Shadows the tv series has an overseas audience even smaller
> >> >than Buffy or Star Trek and look what's about to happen in a couple of
> >> >weeks.
>
> >> A box office failure?
>
> > JINX! You owe me a soda!
>
> ...and your post beat mine by one minute...because I type really slowly.
And Tom says he *reads* slowly. You guys better not converse here, or
> >> "nick" <nickmacpherso...@AOL.com> wrote:
> >> >I bet Dark Shadows the tv series has an overseas audience even smaller
> >> >than Buffy or Star Trek and look what's about to happen in a couple of
> >> >weeks.
>
> >> A box office failure?
>
> > JINX! You owe me a soda!
>
> ...and your post beat mine by one minute...because I type really slowly.
you'll throw the n.g. into time-warp...
RichA
Apr 30, 2012, 3:52:08 PM4/30/12
to
On Apr 30, 12:31 pm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 10:19:11 -0400, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
Forgot about that part.
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 10:19:11 -0400, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
nick
Apr 30, 2012, 5:25:01 PM4/30/12
to
in the red once the accountants have finished fudging the numbers to
help the studio avoid paying investors.
nick
Apr 30, 2012, 5:29:45 PM4/30/12
to
> <e78aa716-712f-415f-b17f-3bd9ed501...@n5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
A box office flop probably (well, no, it's a summer blockbuster--
everyone will go the first weekend and that'll be good enough for a
high profile DVD release) but it's still a big international release
and it's based on an American soap opera, so on that level it goes to
show that the relative lack of overseas popularity isn't much of a
factor in what's going to get made. Maybe a better example might be
21 Jump Street where even the people who remembered the show didn't
care about it.
everyone will go the first weekend and that'll be good enough for a
high profile DVD release) but it's still a big international release
and it's based on an American soap opera, so on that level it goes to
show that the relative lack of overseas popularity isn't much of a
factor in what's going to get made. Maybe a better example might be
21 Jump Street where even the people who remembered the show didn't
care about it.
moviePig
Apr 30, 2012, 5:54:26 PM4/30/12
to
profits" is pretty much synonymous with "Kick me"...
Tom
Apr 30, 2012, 7:46:27 PM4/30/12
to
Tom
Tom
Apr 30, 2012, 7:48:15 PM4/30/12
to
Tom
anim8rFSK
Apr 30, 2012, 7:52:45 PM4/30/12
to
In article
<ed633d31-6726-4654...@c4g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
Didn't 21JS get *great* reviews even though the trailers looked almost
Dark Shadows horrid?
<ed633d31-6726-4654...@c4g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
Dark Shadows horrid?
anim8rFSK
Apr 30, 2012, 7:54:07 PM4/30/12
to
In article <jnmrss$ea$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com>
wrote:
Add it to his list of crimes.
Seriously, yeah, that's a good example.
And The Middleman (sing it!)
wrote:
Seriously, yeah, that's a good example.
And The Middleman (sing it!)
Duggy
Apr 30, 2012, 7:53:39 PM4/30/12
to
On Apr 30, 9:51 pm, nick <nickmacpherso...@AOL.com> wrote:
> On Apr 30, 5:35 am, es...@lain.home (Marc Espie) wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <046569e0-0fea-4305-a83c-3e77724ce...@t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com>,Duggy <p.allan.dug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> "John Carter" and "Wrath of the Titans" or whatever that other one was
> > >> called didn't do very well either. Now, contrast that with the
> > >> reception the CLEARLY R-rated "Spartacus" and "Game of Thrones" have
> > >> gotten on TV.
>
> > >>http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
>
> > >Does he want it?
>
> > Full urlhttp://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
>
> I liked this:
>
> 'He tried to instill that same sense of female empowerment into "The
> Avengers" via Scarlett Johansson's character. "Joss did not want the
> Black Widow to be the damsel in distress or just another pretty face
> or a woman who was not capable of holding her own," Johansson says.'
>
> It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
> Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
> own"?
In film it's a risk.
===
= DUG.
===
> On Apr 30, 5:35 am, es...@lain.home (Marc Espie) wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <046569e0-0fea-4305-a83c-3e77724ce...@t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com>,Duggy <p.allan.dug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >On Apr 30, 12:17 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
> > >> appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
> > >> as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
> > >> movie. We saw a $200M+ piece of fantasy crap DIE at the box office
> > >> And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
> > >> appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
> > >> as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
> > >> "John Carter" and "Wrath of the Titans" or whatever that other one was
> > >> called didn't do very well either. Now, contrast that with the
> > >> reception the CLEARLY R-rated "Spartacus" and "Game of Thrones" have
> > >> gotten on TV.
>
> > >>http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
>
> > >Does he want it?
>
> > Full urlhttp://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
>
> I liked this:
>
> 'He tried to instill that same sense of female empowerment into "The
> Avengers" via Scarlett Johansson's character. "Joss did not want the
> Black Widow to be the damsel in distress or just another pretty face
> or a woman who was not capable of holding her own," Johansson says.'
>
> It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
> Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
> own"?
In film it's a risk.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
Apr 30, 2012, 7:52:29 PM4/30/12
to
Gross points, you're laughing.
===
= DUG.
===
Edward McArdle
May 1, 2012, 5:05:47 AM5/1/12
to
In article
<2f67a3ed-8b58-4068...@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>, Duggy
--
Edward McArdle
<2f67a3ed-8b58-4068...@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>, Duggy
<p.allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
>> Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
>> own"?
>
>In film it's a risk.
>
I thought the film hit its stride with the introduction of Black Widow.
>> It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
>> Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
>> own"?
>
>In film it's a risk.
>
--
Edward McArdle
Marc Espie
May 1, 2012, 8:00:17 AM5/1/12
to
In article <98650802-8a2e-4bc1...@q13g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
url anyways ?
nick <nickmacp...@AOL.com> wrote:
>On Apr 30, 5:35 am, es...@lain.home (Marc Espie) wrote:
>> In article
><046569e0-0fea-4305-a83c-3e77724ce...@t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com>,Duggy
> <p.allan.dug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Apr 30, 12:17 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
>> >> appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
>> >> as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
>> >> movie. We saw a $200M+ piece of fantasy crap DIE at the box office
>> >> "John Carter" and "Wrath of the Titans" or whatever that other one was
>> >> called didn't do very well either. Now, contrast that with the
>> >> reception the CLEARLY R-rated "Spartacus" and "Game of Thrones" have
>> >> gotten on TV.
>>
>> >>http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
>>
>> >Does he want it?
>>
>> Full
>urlhttp://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
Hey, Nick, why bother to quote what I said if you're going to CUT the full
>On Apr 30, 5:35 am, es...@lain.home (Marc Espie) wrote:
>> In article
><046569e0-0fea-4305-a83c-3e77724ce...@t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com>,Duggy
> <p.allan.dug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Apr 30, 12:17 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
>> >> appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
>> >> as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
>> >> movie. We saw a $200M+ piece of fantasy crap DIE at the box office
>> >> "John Carter" and "Wrath of the Titans" or whatever that other one was
>> >> called didn't do very well either. Now, contrast that with the
>> >> reception the CLEARLY R-rated "Spartacus" and "Game of Thrones" have
>> >> gotten on TV.
>>
>> >>http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
>>
>> >Does he want it?
>>
>> Full
>urlhttp://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
url anyways ?
anim8rFSK
May 1, 2012, 10:16:53 AM5/1/12
to
In article <mcardle-0105...@10.1.1.4>,
And lost it every time Whiplash was on screen. I mean, really, the guy
is half naked; how hard can he be to kill?
is half naked; how hard can he be to kill?
Movie Fan
May 1, 2012, 11:49:26 AM5/1/12
to
On Apr 30, 11:08 am, anim8rFSK <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> In article
> <e78aa716-712f-415f-b17f-3bd9ed501...@n5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In article
> <e78aa716-712f-415f-b17f-3bd9ed501...@n5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Mason Barge
May 1, 2012, 12:48:25 PM5/1/12
to
On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:54:26 -0700 (PDT), moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com>
wrote:
I don't think it's the studio, per se, as much as the distributors. Where
investors really get outright robbed is when you have a big studio with a
distribution arm. That pretty much guarantees that the studio will be
permanently in the red.
wrote:
investors really get outright robbed is when you have a big studio with a
distribution arm. That pretty much guarantees that the studio will be
permanently in the red.
anim8rFSK
May 1, 2012, 2:39:34 PM5/1/12
to
In article <7q40q7h2veqmpsupc...@4ax.com>,
You don't need a distribution arm. Paramount cheated Art Buchwald out
of his Coming To America money by just paying themselves a huge fee and
declaring the film in the red.
of his Coming To America money by just paying themselves a huge fee and
declaring the film in the red.
nick
May 1, 2012, 5:47:54 PM5/1/12
to
On May 1, 8:00 am, es...@lain.home (Marc Espie) wrote:
> In article <98650802-8a2e-4bc1-9367-d6812cfb4...@q13g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
Sorry but I wasn't aware the first URL was broken until I tried it
just now.
> In article <98650802-8a2e-4bc1-9367-d6812cfb4...@q13g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
just now.
Mason Barge
May 1, 2012, 6:04:50 PM5/1/12
to
sure makes things easier.
Distribution companies make studios look like Honest Abe. They give
classes to gypsies, and cheat them out of half the tuition.
Edward McArdle
May 1, 2012, 8:33:34 PM5/1/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-9B06D...@news.easynews.com>, anim8rFSK
Who was Whiplash??
One thing I found hard to believe (even in a film about comics) was that
Banner could not commit suicide. If he put a gun in his mouth and fired
it, by the time the bullet reached the back of his throat he had turned
into the Hulk!
The implication is, of course, that he is ALWAYS the Hulk.
--
Edward McArdle
One thing I found hard to believe (even in a film about comics) was that
Banner could not commit suicide. If he put a gun in his mouth and fired
it, by the time the bullet reached the back of his throat he had turned
into the Hulk!
The implication is, of course, that he is ALWAYS the Hulk.
--
Edward McArdle
anim8rFSK
May 1, 2012, 11:55:16 PM5/1/12
to
In article <mcardle-0205...@10.1.1.3>,
Banner fast enough to kill him dead. You can't kill the Hulk at all.
mca...@ozemail.com.au (Edward McArdle) wrote:
> In article <anim8rfsk-9B06D...@news.easynews.com>, anim8rFSK
> <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <mcardle-0105...@10.1.1.4>,
> > mca...@ozemail.com.au (Edward McArdle) wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> <2f67a3ed-8b58-4068...@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>, Duggy
> >> <p.allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >> It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
> >> >> Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
> >> >> own"?
> >> >
> >> >In film it's a risk.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I thought the film hit its stride with the introduction of Black Widow.
> >
> >And lost it every time Whiplash was on screen. I mean, really, the guy
> >is half naked; how hard can he be to kill?
>
> Who was Whiplash??
I thought we were talking Iron Man Two, which introduced the Black Widow.
> In article <anim8rfsk-9B06D...@news.easynews.com>, anim8rFSK
> <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <mcardle-0105...@10.1.1.4>,
> > mca...@ozemail.com.au (Edward McArdle) wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> <2f67a3ed-8b58-4068...@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>, Duggy
> >> <p.allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >> It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
> >> >> Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
> >> >> own"?
> >> >
> >> >In film it's a risk.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I thought the film hit its stride with the introduction of Black Widow.
> >
> >And lost it every time Whiplash was on screen. I mean, really, the guy
> >is half naked; how hard can he be to kill?
>
> Who was Whiplash??
>
> One thing I found hard to believe (even in a film about comics) was that
> Banner could not commit suicide. If he put a gun in his mouth and fired
> it, by the time the bullet reached the back of his throat he had turned
> into the Hulk!
> The implication is, of course, that he is ALWAYS the Hulk.
That's out of the comics (although I'm sure it's varied); you can't kill
> One thing I found hard to believe (even in a film about comics) was that
> Banner could not commit suicide. If he put a gun in his mouth and fired
> it, by the time the bullet reached the back of his throat he had turned
> into the Hulk!
> The implication is, of course, that he is ALWAYS the Hulk.
Banner fast enough to kill him dead. You can't kill the Hulk at all.
Arthur Lipscomb
May 2, 2012, 12:28:38 AM5/2/12
to
On 5/1/2012 8:55 PM, anim8rFSK wrote:
> In article<mcardle-0205...@10.1.1.3>,
> mca...@ozemail.com.au (Edward McArdle) wrote:
>
>> In article<anim8rfsk-9B06D...@news.easynews.com>, anim8rFSK
>> <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> In article<mcardle-0105...@10.1.1.4>,
>>> mca...@ozemail.com.au (Edward McArdle) wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article
>>>> <2f67a3ed-8b58-4068...@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>, Duggy
>>>> <p.allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
>>>>>> Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
>>>>>> own"?
>>>>>
>>>>> In film it's a risk.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought the film hit its stride with the introduction of Black Widow.
>>>
>>> And lost it every time Whiplash was on screen. I mean, really, the guy
>>> is half naked; how hard can he be to kill?
>>
>> Who was Whiplash??
Mickey Rourke's character. He had some kind of laser whip weapon.
> In article<mcardle-0205...@10.1.1.3>,
> mca...@ozemail.com.au (Edward McArdle) wrote:
>
>> In article<anim8rfsk-9B06D...@news.easynews.com>, anim8rFSK
>> <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> In article<mcardle-0105...@10.1.1.4>,
>>> mca...@ozemail.com.au (Edward McArdle) wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article
>>>> <2f67a3ed-8b58-4068...@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>, Duggy
>>>> <p.allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
>>>>>> Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
>>>>>> own"?
>>>>>
>>>>> In film it's a risk.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought the film hit its stride with the introduction of Black Widow.
>>>
>>> And lost it every time Whiplash was on screen. I mean, really, the guy
>>> is half naked; how hard can he be to kill?
>>
>> Who was Whiplash??
>
> I thought we were talking Iron Man Two, which introduced the Black Widow.
included her wrist weapons. I'm not familiar with the character so I
didn't notice the detail the first time around. I noticed them glowing
in one of the trailers so apparently she'll get to use them during the
movie.
>>
>> One thing I found hard to believe (even in a film about comics) was that
>> Banner could not commit suicide. If he put a gun in his mouth and fired
>> it, by the time the bullet reached the back of his throat he had turned
>> into the Hulk!
>> The implication is, of course, that he is ALWAYS the Hulk.
>
> That's out of the comics (although I'm sure it's varied); you can't kill
> Banner fast enough to kill him dead. You can't kill the Hulk at all.
>
throwing him into space and letting him float in nothingness for all
eternity. Use a transporter to beam him away and never re-materialize
him. Transport him 4 billion years into the past. There *has* to be
ways to deal with the hulk even if he's not technically killed.
David Johnston
May 2, 2012, 12:53:49 AM5/2/12
to
On 5/1/2012 10:28 PM, Arthur Lipscomb wrote:
>>> One thing I found hard to believe (even in a film about comics) was that
>>> Banner could not commit suicide. If he put a gun in his mouth and fired
>>> it, by the time the bullet reached the back of his throat he had turned
>>> into the Hulk!
>>> The implication is, of course, that he is ALWAYS the Hulk.
>>
>> That's out of the comics (although I'm sure it's varied); you can't kill
>> Banner fast enough to kill him dead. You can't kill the Hulk at all.
>>
>
> What about suffocating him (force field bubble over the head)? Or
> throwing him into space and letting him float in nothingness for all
> eternity. Use a transporter to beam him away and never re-materialize
> him. Transport him 4 billion years into the past. There *has* to be ways
> to deal with the hulk even if he's not technically killed.
>
>
There's been a great deal of flinging the Hulk into space and into
>>> One thing I found hard to believe (even in a film about comics) was that
>>> Banner could not commit suicide. If he put a gun in his mouth and fired
>>> it, by the time the bullet reached the back of his throat he had turned
>>> into the Hulk!
>>> The implication is, of course, that he is ALWAYS the Hulk.
>>
>> That's out of the comics (although I'm sure it's varied); you can't kill
>> Banner fast enough to kill him dead. You can't kill the Hulk at all.
>>
>
> What about suffocating him (force field bubble over the head)? Or
> throwing him into space and letting him float in nothingness for all
> eternity. Use a transporter to beam him away and never re-materialize
> him. Transport him 4 billion years into the past. There *has* to be ways
> to deal with the hulk even if he's not technically killed.
>
>
parallel universes over the years.
anim8rFSK
May 2, 2012, 4:00:24 AM5/2/12
to
In article <jnqd5n$p0t$1...@dont-email.me>,
I hope so, 'cause she's fighting waaaay out of her weight class.
would kill him (I think he can go indefinitely without air) and even if
you did kill him, he'd probably get better.
Or
> throwing him into space and letting him float in nothingness for all
They've tossed him to other planets, and he just made his way back
madder than ever. And Marvel nothingness is pretty crowded; they tried
to get rid of Doom that way once, and he immediately ran into Rama Tut
(who may or may not be Doom's future or past self) who was just passing
by in his spaceship.
> eternity. Use a transporter to beam him away and never re-materialize
You'd think that would work on *anybody* - the only good guy I've ever
seen use that trick was James Tiberius Kirk. Kirk rocks!
> him. Transport him 4 billion years into the past. There *has* to be
> ways to deal with the hulk even if he's not technically killed.
You'd think that Dr. Strange could do *something* - there must be an
empty dimension to abandon the Hulk in. Of course one problem is that
none of the good guys that might be capable of killing the Hulk, like
Reed Richards, are willing to kill the Hulk, and certainly not in cold
blood. Sooner or later he's got to piss off somebody like Doom or
Galactus though ...
>
>
> >>
> >> One thing I found hard to believe (even in a film about comics) was that
> >> Banner could not commit suicide. If he put a gun in his mouth and fired
> >> it, by the time the bullet reached the back of his throat he had turned
> >> into the Hulk!
> >> The implication is, of course, that he is ALWAYS the Hulk.
> >
> > That's out of the comics (although I'm sure it's varied); you can't kill
> > Banner fast enough to kill him dead. You can't kill the Hulk at all.
> >
>
> What about suffocating him (force field bubble over the head)?
I don't think you could do it, and if you could do it I don't think it
>
> >>
> >> One thing I found hard to believe (even in a film about comics) was that
> >> Banner could not commit suicide. If he put a gun in his mouth and fired
> >> it, by the time the bullet reached the back of his throat he had turned
> >> into the Hulk!
> >> The implication is, of course, that he is ALWAYS the Hulk.
> >
> > That's out of the comics (although I'm sure it's varied); you can't kill
> > Banner fast enough to kill him dead. You can't kill the Hulk at all.
> >
>
> What about suffocating him (force field bubble over the head)?
would kill him (I think he can go indefinitely without air) and even if
you did kill him, he'd probably get better.
Or
> throwing him into space and letting him float in nothingness for all
madder than ever. And Marvel nothingness is pretty crowded; they tried
to get rid of Doom that way once, and he immediately ran into Rama Tut
(who may or may not be Doom's future or past self) who was just passing
by in his spaceship.
> eternity. Use a transporter to beam him away and never re-materialize
seen use that trick was James Tiberius Kirk. Kirk rocks!
> him. Transport him 4 billion years into the past. There *has* to be
> ways to deal with the hulk even if he's not technically killed.
empty dimension to abandon the Hulk in. Of course one problem is that
none of the good guys that might be capable of killing the Hulk, like
Reed Richards, are willing to kill the Hulk, and certainly not in cold
blood. Sooner or later he's got to piss off somebody like Doom or
Galactus though ...
Obveeus
May 2, 2012, 8:37:23 AM5/2/12
to
identical responses to a message. However, my post was 1 minute ahead of
his, so my typing must be slightly faster than his reading. Either way,
what we lack in speed we make up for in diligence.
Duggy
May 3, 2012, 5:20:18 PM5/3/12
to
On May 2, 2:28 pm, Arthur Lipscomb <art...@alum.calberkeley.org>
wrote:
> Or
> throwing him into space and letting him float in nothingness for all
> eternity.
That's not killing him. That's how they got rid of Doomsday *before*
he killed Superman.
> Use a transporter to beam him away and never re-materialize
> him.
That's not killing him. That's how they killed Scotty... before he
came back.
> Transport him 4 billion years into the past.
That's not killing him, that's making him 4 billion years old in the
present and there being 2 of him at one point. It may also be
changing human evolution.
> There *has* to be
> ways to deal with the hulk even if he's not technically killed.
Who said there was no way to *deal* with him? It was stated he can't
be killed. No one said he can't be dealt with.
===
= DUG.
===
wrote:
> What about suffocating him (force field bubble over the head)?
Sometimes that kills immortals, sometimes it doesn't.
> Or
> throwing him into space and letting him float in nothingness for all
> eternity.
he killed Superman.
> Use a transporter to beam him away and never re-materialize
> him.
came back.
> Transport him 4 billion years into the past.
present and there being 2 of him at one point. It may also be
changing human evolution.
> There *has* to be
> ways to deal with the hulk even if he's not technically killed.
be killed. No one said he can't be dealt with.
===
= DUG.
===
Jim G.
May 5, 2012, 5:20:11 PM5/5/12
to
Duggy sent the following on 4/30/2012 2:59 AM:
--
Jim G. | Waukesha, WI
"I find it's best if you just ... go with it." -- Lincoln Lee, providing
us with FRINGE's "Every question just leads to more questions" moment
> On Apr 30, 12:17 pm, RichA<rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
>> appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
>> as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
>> movie. We saw a $200M+ piece of fantasy crap DIE at the box office
>> "John Carter" and "Wrath of the Titans" or whatever that other one was
>> called didn't do very well either. Now, contrast that with the
>> reception the CLEARLY R-rated "Spartacus" and "Game of Thrones" have
>> gotten on TV.
>>
>> http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
>
> Does he want it?
Who cares? The Whedon Wackers want it, and that's all that matters.
>> And they should let him do the movie HIS way. Stop always trying to
>> appeal to s---head tweens with PG-rated SWILL. "Buffy" was A14 rated
>> as a TV show and it should at least continue that as a big-screen
>> movie. We saw a $200M+ piece of fantasy crap DIE at the box office
>> "John Carter" and "Wrath of the Titans" or whatever that other one was
>> called didn't do very well either. Now, contrast that with the
>> reception the CLEARLY R-rated "Spartacus" and "Game of Thrones" have
>> gotten on TV.
>>
>> http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/04/the-avengers-director-joss-whed...
>
> Does he want it?
--
Jim G. | Waukesha, WI
"I find it's best if you just ... go with it." -- Lincoln Lee, providing
us with FRINGE's "Every question just leads to more questions" moment
Jim G.
May 5, 2012, 5:21:56 PM5/5/12
to
Obveeus sent the following on 4/30/2012 9:19 AM:
release well.
> "moviePig"<pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 30, 9:47 am, "Obveeus"<Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> $250M worldwide gross? Does 'Buffy' really have any potential for
>>> significant gross outside the USA?
>>
>> Only if there are cultural equivalents to the name 'Buffy' (...which
>> even in the U.S. has likely already lost some of its derisive
>> connotation). Without it, you've just got another manufactured Marvel
>> milieu.
>
> I tend to think that Buffy is a very American product, even moreso than Star
> Trek which also struggles to find an overseas film audience...and Buffy
> isn't 1/20th the draw of Star Trek in the USA. I think it far more likely
> that a Buffy film would gross $25M than $250M.
BUFFY VISITS THE CABIN IN THE WOODS might gross $40M if they time its
>
>> On Apr 30, 9:47 am, "Obveeus"<Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> $250M worldwide gross? Does 'Buffy' really have any potential for
>>> significant gross outside the USA?
>>
>> Only if there are cultural equivalents to the name 'Buffy' (...which
>> even in the U.S. has likely already lost some of its derisive
>> connotation). Without it, you've just got another manufactured Marvel
>> milieu.
>
> I tend to think that Buffy is a very American product, even moreso than Star
> Trek which also struggles to find an overseas film audience...and Buffy
> isn't 1/20th the draw of Star Trek in the USA. I think it far more likely
> that a Buffy film would gross $25M than $250M.
release well.
Jim G.
May 5, 2012, 5:22:38 PM5/5/12
to
anim8rFSK sent the following on 4/30/2012 6:54 PM:
> In article<jnmrss$ea$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "anim8rFSK"<anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I do sometimes think that if I had Bill Gates level money, and my
>>> favorite TV show was on the bubble, I'd just call the network and say
>>> "I'll buy all your ad time for Angel Season 6" ...
>>
>> So we should all hate Bill Gates for not saving Better Off Ted, right?
>
> Add it to his list of crimes.
>
> Seriously, yeah, that's a good example.
>
> And The Middleman (sing it!)
The what?
> wrote:
>
>> "anim8rFSK"<anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I do sometimes think that if I had Bill Gates level money, and my
>>> favorite TV show was on the bubble, I'd just call the network and say
>>> "I'll buy all your ad time for Angel Season 6" ...
>>
>> So we should all hate Bill Gates for not saving Better Off Ted, right?
>
> Add it to his list of crimes.
>
> Seriously, yeah, that's a good example.
>
> And The Middleman (sing it!)
Jim G.
May 5, 2012, 5:26:22 PM5/5/12
to
anim8rFSK sent the following on 5/1/2012 9:16 AM:
The Avengers tend to have this whole no-kill thing that just gets really
old at times. At the very least, you'd think that they could farm out
some work to The Punisher once in a while.
old at times. At the very least, you'd think that they could farm out
some work to The Punisher once in a while.
Mason Barge
May 6, 2012, 3:03:09 PM5/6/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 16:21:56 -0500, "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com> wrote:
>Obveeus sent the following on 4/30/2012 9:19 AM:
>> "moviePig"<pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 30, 9:47 am, "Obveeus"<Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> $250M worldwide gross? Does 'Buffy' really have any potential for
>>>> significant gross outside the USA?
>>>
>>> Only if there are cultural equivalents to the name 'Buffy' (...which
>>> even in the U.S. has likely already lost some of its derisive
>>> connotation). Without it, you've just got another manufactured Marvel
>>> milieu.
>>
>> I tend to think that Buffy is a very American product, even moreso than Star
>> Trek which also struggles to find an overseas film audience...and Buffy
>> isn't 1/20th the draw of Star Trek in the USA. I think it far more likely
>> that a Buffy film would gross $25M than $250M.
>
>BUFFY VISITS THE CABIN IN THE WOODS might gross $40M if they time its
>release well.
If they all get nekkid, I'm good for 10 tickets. Nekkid Charisma
>Obveeus sent the following on 4/30/2012 9:19 AM:
>> "moviePig"<pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 30, 9:47 am, "Obveeus"<Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> $250M worldwide gross? Does 'Buffy' really have any potential for
>>>> significant gross outside the USA?
>>>
>>> Only if there are cultural equivalents to the name 'Buffy' (...which
>>> even in the U.S. has likely already lost some of its derisive
>>> connotation). Without it, you've just got another manufactured Marvel
>>> milieu.
>>
>> I tend to think that Buffy is a very American product, even moreso than Star
>> Trek which also struggles to find an overseas film audience...and Buffy
>> isn't 1/20th the draw of Star Trek in the USA. I think it far more likely
>> that a Buffy film would gross $25M than $250M.
>
>BUFFY VISITS THE CABIN IN THE WOODS might gross $40M if they time its
>release well.
Carpenter upside down with her guts hanging out, 20 tickets and I'll buy
the action figure.
anim8rFSK
May 6, 2012, 3:04:58 PM5/6/12
to
In article <jo6fbu$6nk$4...@news.albasani.net>,
fall left and right before him and they clearly aren't getting up again.
None of this A-Team knock them through a wall and another 20 feet crap
and the jump up and skitter away. Stark's enemies go down and don't get
up again. And Whiplash is threatening Pepper and Happy? He is *so*
toast.
"Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com> wrote:
> anim8rFSK sent the following on 5/1/2012 9:16 AM:
> > In article<mcardle-0105...@10.1.1.4>,
> > mca...@ozemail.com.au (Edward McArdle) wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> <2f67a3ed-8b58-4068...@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>, Duggy
> >> <p.allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>> It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
> >>>> Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
> >>>> own"?
> >>>
> >>> In film it's a risk.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I thought the film hit its stride with the introduction of Black Widow.
> >
> > And lost it every time Whiplash was on screen. I mean, really, the guy
> > is half naked; how hard can he be to kill?
>
> The Avengers tend to have this whole no-kill thing that just gets really
> old at times. At the very least, you'd think that they could farm out
> some work to The Punisher once in a while.
The Avengers might, but Tony Stark in Iron Man certainly doesn't; people
> anim8rFSK sent the following on 5/1/2012 9:16 AM:
> > In article<mcardle-0105...@10.1.1.4>,
> > mca...@ozemail.com.au (Edward McArdle) wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> <2f67a3ed-8b58-4068...@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>, Duggy
> >> <p.allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>> It's been awhile since I've read the comic books, but was the Black
> >>>> Widow ever a "damsel in distress" who wasn't "capable of holding her
> >>>> own"?
> >>>
> >>> In film it's a risk.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I thought the film hit its stride with the introduction of Black Widow.
> >
> > And lost it every time Whiplash was on screen. I mean, really, the guy
> > is half naked; how hard can he be to kill?
>
> The Avengers tend to have this whole no-kill thing that just gets really
> old at times. At the very least, you'd think that they could farm out
> some work to The Punisher once in a while.
fall left and right before him and they clearly aren't getting up again.
None of this A-Team knock them through a wall and another 20 feet crap
and the jump up and skitter away. Stark's enemies go down and don't get
up again. And Whiplash is threatening Pepper and Happy? He is *so*
toast.
anim8rFSK
May 6, 2012, 3:06:16 PM5/6/12
to
In article <jo6fbt$6nk$3...@news.albasani.net>,
"Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com> wrote:
> anim8rFSK sent the following on 4/30/2012 6:54 PM:
> > In article<jnmrss$ea$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "anim8rFSK"<anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I do sometimes think that if I had Bill Gates level money, and my
> >>> favorite TV show was on the bubble, I'd just call the network and say
> >>> "I'll buy all your ad time for Angel Season 6" ...
> >>
> >> So we should all hate Bill Gates for not saving Better Off Ted, right?
> >
> > Add it to his list of crimes.
> >
> > Seriously, yeah, that's a good example.
> >
> > And The Middleman (sing it!)
>
> The what?
Middleman!
> anim8rFSK sent the following on 4/30/2012 6:54 PM:
> > In article<jnmrss$ea$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "anim8rFSK"<anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I do sometimes think that if I had Bill Gates level money, and my
> >>> favorite TV show was on the bubble, I'd just call the network and say
> >>> "I'll buy all your ad time for Angel Season 6" ...
> >>
> >> So we should all hate Bill Gates for not saving Better Off Ted, right?
> >
> > Add it to his list of crimes.
> >
> > Seriously, yeah, that's a good example.
> >
> > And The Middleman (sing it!)
>
> The what?
David Johnston
May 6, 2012, 3:19:54 PM5/6/12
to
>>> And lost it every time Whiplash was on screen. I mean, really, the guy
>>> is half naked; how hard can he be to kill?
>>
in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aeYaTvkWNc
As you can see the whips automagically deflect two repulsor shots before
Stark switches to old-fashioned fisticuffs and puts him down effortlessly.
Obveeus
May 6, 2012, 6:54:52 PM5/6/12
to
LGi...@gmail.com
May 6, 2012, 10:56:16 PM5/6/12
to
>Re: Whedon should get "Buffy" back if he succeeds with "The Avengers"
"The Avengers' smashes opening-weekend record with $200.3 million."
"The Avengers' smashes opening-weekend record with $200.3 million."
Ken Wesson
May 7, 2012, 1:22:32 AM5/7/12
to
Jim G.
May 7, 2012, 11:14:52 AM5/7/12
to
anim8rFSK sent the following on 5/6/2012 2:04 PM:
Tony still sucks up to Cap, though. Always has and always will. Heck,
they *all* do, for that matter. And they're probably right to do so. Cap
can be the most boring Boy Scout in the room, but he also lacks Tony's
(among others) tendency to go off half-cocked on a regular basis. And
since Cap isn't a fan of a good old-fashioned slaughter of bad guys, it
takes a lot of fun out of things at times.
they *all* do, for that matter. And they're probably right to do so. Cap
can be the most boring Boy Scout in the room, but he also lacks Tony's
(among others) tendency to go off half-cocked on a regular basis. And
since Cap isn't a fan of a good old-fashioned slaughter of bad guys, it
takes a lot of fun out of things at times.
Jim G.
May 7, 2012, 11:15:51 AM5/7/12
to
anim8rFSK sent the following on 5/6/2012 2:06 PM:
Your caps lock key seems to be broken. But you're welcome, anyway! :)
anim8rFSK
May 7, 2012, 1:09:05 PM5/7/12
to
In article <jo8q08$edt$1...@news.albasani.net>,
Unfortunately, this doesn't work as well now as it did in 1966. That
Cap had had a MUCH bigger career, and those Avengers actually remembered
him. Now, this Cap had a stupid run as as chorus girl, and a couple
secret missions, and these Avengers grandparents (with the exception of
Howard Stark) might have heard of him. Also, I have no respect at all
for the movie Cap, partly from not liking the actor, and ... the movie
Cap carried a gun and just plain killed people, so he's not really in a
position to say by who's hand shall perish a villain.
http://littlestuffedbull.com/images/comics/zemo/avengers15.jpg
Cap had had a MUCH bigger career, and those Avengers actually remembered
him. Now, this Cap had a stupid run as as chorus girl, and a couple
secret missions, and these Avengers grandparents (with the exception of
Howard Stark) might have heard of him. Also, I have no respect at all
for the movie Cap, partly from not liking the actor, and ... the movie
Cap carried a gun and just plain killed people, so he's not really in a
position to say by who's hand shall perish a villain.
http://littlestuffedbull.com/images/comics/zemo/avengers15.jpg
Mason Barge
May 7, 2012, 2:51:05 PM5/7/12
to
Obveeus
May 7, 2012, 3:23:56 PM5/7/12
to
"Mason Barge" <mason...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 6 May 2012 18:54:52 -0400, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>"Mason Barge" <mason...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 05 May 2012 16:21:56 -0500, "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>BUFFY VISITS THE CABIN IN THE WOODS might gross $40M if they time its
>>>>release well.
>>>
>>> If they all get nekkid, I'm good for 10 tickets. Nekkid Charisma
>>> Carpenter
>>
>>That is what Playboy Magazine is for: June 2004.
>
> You cut off the important half of my post.
BTR1701
May 7, 2012, 8:28:59 PM5/7/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-C8B13...@news.easynews.com>,
It always seemed odd to me that he was a soldier, but the idea of him
carrying a gun into war was somehow evol.
carrying a gun into war was somehow evol.
anim8rFSK
May 8, 2012, 2:02:59 AM5/8/12
to
In article <atropos-2BA734...@news.giganews.com>,
One presumes Steve Rogers, at least when he was enlisted, wouldn't have
any compunction about firearms. BTW, the movie got his rank wrong;
Rogers wasn't a Captain just because he had the Captain America ID - he
was a private.
any compunction about firearms. BTW, the movie got his rank wrong;
Rogers wasn't a Captain just because he had the Captain America ID - he
was a private.
David Johnston
May 8, 2012, 2:44:05 AM5/8/12
to
any of them can do.
>
> One presumes Steve Rogers, at least when he was enlisted, wouldn't have
> any compunction about firearms. BTW, the movie got his rank wrong;
> Rogers wasn't a Captain just because he had the Captain America ID - he
> was a private.
>
BTR1701
May 8, 2012, 3:19:08 AM5/8/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-844AF...@news.easynews.com>,
That doesn't make any sense. In order to lead and command soldiers in
battle, he'd have to had the rank necessary to do so. During the war,
he'd almost certainly have been given at least a field promotion. If he
didn't receive one and was a private the entire time, that's just
ridiculous, and something that sorely needed to be retconned.
battle, he'd have to had the rank necessary to do so. During the war,
he'd almost certainly have been given at least a field promotion. If he
didn't receive one and was a private the entire time, that's just
ridiculous, and something that sorely needed to be retconned.
BTR1701
May 8, 2012, 3:20:04 AM5/8/12
to
anim8rFSK
May 8, 2012, 10:59:51 AM5/8/12
to
In article <atropos-3FCA31...@news.giganews.com>,
It's possible that Captain America carried a different rank than Steve
Rogers I suppose. In the comics, his immediate superiors didn't know
who he (or Bucky, who is supposed to be a kid) were so they were
sneaking off on missions. The guys you see him commanding in the movie
are Nick Fury's Howling Commandos, minus Nick Fury. I don't think Cap
would have been commanding them in the comics.
Rogers I suppose. In the comics, his immediate superiors didn't know
who he (or Bucky, who is supposed to be a kid) were so they were
sneaking off on missions. The guys you see him commanding in the movie
are Nick Fury's Howling Commandos, minus Nick Fury. I don't think Cap
would have been commanding them in the comics.
BTR1701
May 8, 2012, 12:00:04 PM5/8/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-942C0...@news.easynews.com>,
Just being able to sneak away unnoticed would probably have been one of
the biggest hurdles of every mission. Forget battling the Red Skull.
I liked the way Avengers was both entertaining *and* educational. For
example, I learned that even the Hulk can't lift Thor's hammer. I wonder
if Superman could?
the biggest hurdles of every mission. Forget battling the Red Skull.
I liked the way Avengers was both entertaining *and* educational. For
example, I learned that even the Hulk can't lift Thor's hammer. I wonder
if Superman could?
shawn
May 8, 2012, 12:34:26 PM5/8/12
to
Thor's hammer gets power via magic, which is one of the things that
Superman can be affected by. Amazo, on the other hand, should be able
to lift the hammer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazo
anim8rFSK
May 8, 2012, 2:14:33 PM5/8/12
to
In article <qgiiq75dvntbkqs1a...@4ax.com>,
It's way more complicated than that. It's magic, but it's Odin's
enchantment, that the wielder has to be 'worthy'
Odin can lift it, as can Thor. Stan & Jack used to have fun looking for
ways around the rule; the Cobra lifted it with a giant atomic powered
mechanical arm, 'cause it was the arm lifting it and not the Cobra and
the magic didn't extend towards mechanical devices. That's a problem if
you think about it, 'cause you'd think if that worked, then Iron Man
should be able to lift it. Captain America (comics version) is worthy,
as was Beta Ray Bill, which came as a surprise to Thor as he was
fighting the guy at the time and suddenly his foe had the hammer ...
Back to Superman ... I'd bet the Silver Age Superman was worthy, but not
any of the incarnations since (and including) the dreary John Byrne
retcon. I bet Captain Marvel could too.
LOL, there's a Wiki for it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mjolnir_(comics)#Other_wielders
It's not entirely correct. The Destroyer can (and has) lifted the
hammer, and IIRC the very first incident was when the evil Cobra picked
her up with a giant atomic powered robot arm which was certainly non
sentient.
enchantment, that the wielder has to be 'worthy'
Odin can lift it, as can Thor. Stan & Jack used to have fun looking for
ways around the rule; the Cobra lifted it with a giant atomic powered
mechanical arm, 'cause it was the arm lifting it and not the Cobra and
the magic didn't extend towards mechanical devices. That's a problem if
you think about it, 'cause you'd think if that worked, then Iron Man
should be able to lift it. Captain America (comics version) is worthy,
as was Beta Ray Bill, which came as a surprise to Thor as he was
fighting the guy at the time and suddenly his foe had the hammer ...
Back to Superman ... I'd bet the Silver Age Superman was worthy, but not
any of the incarnations since (and including) the dreary John Byrne
retcon. I bet Captain Marvel could too.
LOL, there's a Wiki for it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mjolnir_(comics)#Other_wielders
It's not entirely correct. The Destroyer can (and has) lifted the
hammer, and IIRC the very first incident was when the evil Cobra picked
her up with a giant atomic powered robot arm which was certainly non
sentient.
David Johnston
May 8, 2012, 4:57:31 PM5/8/12
to
hammer. Even Thor has become unworthy and lost the hammer.
BTR1701
May 8, 2012, 9:03:49 PM5/8/12
to
so...
Duggy
May 9, 2012, 1:46:00 AM5/9/12
to
On May 9, 2:00 am, BTR1701 <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
> I liked the way Avengers was both entertaining *and* educational. For
> example, I learned that even the Hulk can't lift Thor's hammer. I wonder
> if Superman could?
Wonder Woman can.
> I liked the way Avengers was both entertaining *and* educational. For
> example, I learned that even the Hulk can't lift Thor's hammer. I wonder
> if Superman could?
===
= DUG.
===
Obveeus
May 9, 2012, 7:15:12 AM5/9/12
to
otherwise it would burrow itself to the center of the Earth when dropped.
David Johnston
May 9, 2012, 9:41:57 AM5/9/12
to
planet at people.
BTR1701
May 9, 2012, 10:43:42 AM5/9/12
to
In article <jodjk3$ot0$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com>
wrote:
But by moving the earth, the hammer moves, too, which means Superman is
lifting/moving it.
wrote:
lifting/moving it.
David Johnston
May 9, 2012, 10:50:40 AM5/9/12
to
can be moved indirectly. You just can't go over, pick up and use it,
unless you pass the fitness test.
Obveeus
May 9, 2012, 10:58:40 AM5/9/12
to
David Johnston
May 9, 2012, 2:36:17 PM5/9/12
to
anim8rFSK
May 9, 2012, 2:56:42 PM5/9/12
to
shawn
May 9, 2012, 3:07:06 PM5/9/12
to
On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:50:40 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
wrote:
So you can move it (by moving it indirectly) but you can't take
advantage of the powers of the hammer or wield it unless you are
'worthy.'
wrote:
advantage of the powers of the hammer or wield it unless you are
'worthy.'
Jim G.
May 9, 2012, 3:34:30 PM5/9/12
to
anim8rFSK sent the following on 5/7/2012 12:09 PM:
I guess I just assumed that he did much of what the comics had him
doing, but we just didn't see much of it onscreen. But yeah, if what we
saw was all that he did, then the hero worship was a bit
excessive--especially since his best work was only seen by a very
limited number of people. Even among those we saw him save from behind
enemy lines, very few saw him doing actual battle, or anything.
> Also, I have no respect at all
> for the movie Cap, partly from not liking the actor,
Yeah, I still think that Capt. Awesome from CHUCK would have been a
better choice. He may not be Hollywood's best actor by a long shot, but
neither is Evans. And really, anyone you put in that dorky movie mask is
gonna look ... well, dorky.
> and ... the movie
> Cap carried a gun and just plain killed people, so he's not really in a
> position to say by who's hand shall perish a villain.
>
> http://littlestuffedbull.com/images/comics/zemo/avengers15.jpg
I'm just grateful that we didn't get Bucky in the movie--whether as
Bucky or as Cap. I've always hoped for a DC-Marvel crossover in which
Bucky and Robin (Dick or Damian--take your pick) beat each other to
death in a painful and bloody and epic 22-page battle.
doing, but we just didn't see much of it onscreen. But yeah, if what we
saw was all that he did, then the hero worship was a bit
excessive--especially since his best work was only seen by a very
limited number of people. Even among those we saw him save from behind
enemy lines, very few saw him doing actual battle, or anything.
> Also, I have no respect at all
> for the movie Cap, partly from not liking the actor,
better choice. He may not be Hollywood's best actor by a long shot, but
neither is Evans. And really, anyone you put in that dorky movie mask is
gonna look ... well, dorky.
> and ... the movie
> Cap carried a gun and just plain killed people, so he's not really in a
> position to say by who's hand shall perish a villain.
>
> http://littlestuffedbull.com/images/comics/zemo/avengers15.jpg
Bucky or as Cap. I've always hoped for a DC-Marvel crossover in which
Bucky and Robin (Dick or Damian--take your pick) beat each other to
death in a painful and bloody and epic 22-page battle.
anim8rFSK
May 9, 2012, 8:27:27 PM5/9/12
to
In article <joegsb$cfg$1...@news.albasani.net>,
Yep. People seem to rave about Evans' acting, but I just don't see it.
killed real good, too. I won't see The Avengers 'til next week.
>
> > and ... the movie
> > Cap carried a gun and just plain killed people, so he's not really in a
> > position to say by who's hand shall perish a villain.
> >
> > http://littlestuffedbull.com/images/comics/zemo/avengers15.jpg
>
> I'm just grateful that we didn't get Bucky in the movie--whether as
> Bucky or as Cap. I've always hoped for a DC-Marvel crossover in which
> Bucky and Robin (Dick or Damian--take your pick) beat each other to
> death in a painful and bloody and epic 22-page battle.
Uh ... what movie we talking about? Bucky's in Captain America. Gets
> > and ... the movie
> > Cap carried a gun and just plain killed people, so he's not really in a
> > position to say by who's hand shall perish a villain.
> >
> > http://littlestuffedbull.com/images/comics/zemo/avengers15.jpg
>
> I'm just grateful that we didn't get Bucky in the movie--whether as
> Bucky or as Cap. I've always hoped for a DC-Marvel crossover in which
> Bucky and Robin (Dick or Damian--take your pick) beat each other to
> death in a painful and bloody and epic 22-page battle.
killed real good, too. I won't see The Avengers 'til next week.
anim8rFSK
May 9, 2012, 8:28:32 PM5/9/12
to
In article <41glq7p5u4m1vnge6...@4ax.com>,
We used to have that kind of argument on the playground. Like, if Thor
left his hammer in your car, could you drive it around?
Of course the comics Thor ... it would cease to matter after 60 seconds
anyway. :)
left his hammer in your car, could you drive it around?
Of course the comics Thor ... it would cease to matter after 60 seconds
anyway. :)
BTR1701
May 9, 2012, 9:41:42 PM5/9/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-8866B...@news.easynews.com>,
I think it's definitely a subject that needs to be dissected by Sheldon,
Leonard and crew.
Leonard and crew.
BTR1701
May 9, 2012, 9:42:41 PM5/9/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-D3C41...@news.easynews.com>,
I know, and shawn said he couldn't move it, 'cause it's magic, but if he
moves the earth, then the magic doesn't apply. Or something.
moves the earth, then the magic doesn't apply. Or something.
anim8rFSK
May 10, 2012, 12:29:53 AM5/10/12
to
In article <atropos-2D5C53...@news.giganews.com>,
And just listen to whatever Sheldon says and assume he's wrong.
BTR1701
May 10, 2012, 12:34:55 AM5/10/12
to
anim8rFSK
May 10, 2012, 8:36:58 AM5/10/12
to
In article <atropos-976D84...@news.giganews.com>,
Maybe, but Sheldon *is* a DC guy; he might not know enough about Marvel
to be rong.
to be rong.
BTR1701
May 10, 2012, 11:47:27 AM5/10/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-B27F8...@news.easynews.com>,
They've had X-Men discussions before, so they must at least dabble on
the Marvel side.
the Marvel side.
anim8rFSK
May 10, 2012, 1:34:34 PM5/10/12
to
BTR1701
May 10, 2012, 3:17:34 PM5/10/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-0E19A...@news.easynews.com>,
anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> In article <atropos-D35539...@news.giganews.com>,
> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <anim8rfsk-B27F8...@news.easynews.com>,
> > anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <atropos-976D84...@news.giganews.com>,
> > > BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > I think it's definitely a subject that needs to be dissected by
> > > > > > Sheldon, Leonard and crew.
> > > > >
> > > > > And just listen to whatever Sheldon says and assume he's wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Of course. Isn't that the running gag?
> > >
> > > Maybe, but Sheldon *is* a DC guy; he might not know enough about Marvel
> > > to be rong.
> >
> > They've had X-Men discussions before, so they must at least dabble on
> > the Marvel side.
>
> Comics X-Men or movie X-Men?
Can't remember. Had something to do with Wolverine.
> In article <atropos-D35539...@news.giganews.com>,
> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <anim8rfsk-B27F8...@news.easynews.com>,
> > anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <atropos-976D84...@news.giganews.com>,
> > > BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > I think it's definitely a subject that needs to be dissected by
> > > > > > Sheldon, Leonard and crew.
> > > > >
> > > > > And just listen to whatever Sheldon says and assume he's wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Of course. Isn't that the running gag?
> > >
> > > Maybe, but Sheldon *is* a DC guy; he might not know enough about Marvel
> > > to be rong.
> >
> > They've had X-Men discussions before, so they must at least dabble on
> > the Marvel side.
>
> Comics X-Men or movie X-Men?
anim8rFSK
May 10, 2012, 5:13:57 PM5/10/12
to
In article <atropos-41EB68...@news.giganews.com>,
BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> In article <anim8rfsk-0E19A...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <atropos-D35539...@news.giganews.com>,
> > BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <anim8rfsk-B27F8...@news.easynews.com>,
> > > anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <atropos-976D84...@news.giganews.com>,
> > > > BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > I think it's definitely a subject that needs to be dissected by
> > > > > > > Sheldon, Leonard and crew.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And just listen to whatever Sheldon says and assume he's wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course. Isn't that the running gag?
> > > >
> > > > Maybe, but Sheldon *is* a DC guy; he might not know enough about Marvel
> > > > to be rong.
> > >
> > > They've had X-Men discussions before, so they must at least dabble on
> > > the Marvel side.
> >
> > Comics X-Men or movie X-Men?
>
> Can't remember. Had something to do with Wolverine.
Ah. Yeah, Sheldon was wrong about everything about Wolverine. As usual.
> In article <anim8rfsk-0E19A...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <atropos-D35539...@news.giganews.com>,
> > BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <anim8rfsk-B27F8...@news.easynews.com>,
> > > anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <atropos-976D84...@news.giganews.com>,
> > > > BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > I think it's definitely a subject that needs to be dissected by
> > > > > > > Sheldon, Leonard and crew.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And just listen to whatever Sheldon says and assume he's wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course. Isn't that the running gag?
> > > >
> > > > Maybe, but Sheldon *is* a DC guy; he might not know enough about Marvel
> > > > to be rong.
> > >
> > > They've had X-Men discussions before, so they must at least dabble on
> > > the Marvel side.
> >
> > Comics X-Men or movie X-Men?
>
> Can't remember. Had something to do with Wolverine.
Arthur Lipscomb
May 10, 2012, 9:54:11 PM5/10/12
to
they talk about that scene and say he'll be back as Winter Soldier or
something along those lines. I don't follow the comics and couldn't
tell for sure if they were joking or not.
I won't see The Avengers 'til next week.
>
a third time before it leaves theaters.
Remember to stay through *all* of the credits.
anim8rFSK
May 10, 2012, 11:26:30 PM5/10/12
to
In article <johrg3$874$1...@dont-email.me>,
stayed dead, but they finally brought him back as the Winter Soldier,
and he eventually took over the mantle of Captain America and ... they
killed him. Total waste.
Arthur Lipscomb <art...@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
> On 5/9/2012 5:27 PM, anim8rFSK wrote:
> > In article<joegsb$cfg$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> > "Jim G."<jimg...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > Uh ... what movie we talking about? Bucky's in Captain America. Gets
> > killed real good, too.
>
>
> I don't know how serious they were but in the Captain America commentary
> they talk about that scene and say he'll be back as Winter Soldier or
> something along those lines. I don't follow the comics and couldn't
> tell for sure if they were joking or not.
That's the comic storyline. Bucky was the one comic book character that
> On 5/9/2012 5:27 PM, anim8rFSK wrote:
> > In article<joegsb$cfg$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> > "Jim G."<jimg...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > Uh ... what movie we talking about? Bucky's in Captain America. Gets
> > killed real good, too.
>
>
> I don't know how serious they were but in the Captain America commentary
> they talk about that scene and say he'll be back as Winter Soldier or
> something along those lines. I don't follow the comics and couldn't
> tell for sure if they were joking or not.
stayed dead, but they finally brought him back as the Winter Soldier,
and he eventually took over the mantle of Captain America and ... they
killed him. Total waste.
>
> I won't see The Avengers 'til next week.
> >
>
>
> I've already seen it twice now. I'm definitely going to have to see it
> a third time before it leaves theaters.
>
> Remember to stay through *all* of the credits.
Roger Wilcox. :)
> I won't see The Avengers 'til next week.
> >
>
>
> I've already seen it twice now. I'm definitely going to have to see it
> a third time before it leaves theaters.
>
> Remember to stay through *all* of the credits.
iarwain
May 11, 2012, 12:24:12 AM5/11/12
to
> Maybe, but Sheldon *is* a DC guy
On the new episode tonight, he was saying the Green Lantern movie
sucked (not his exact words).
Of course, Sheldon has several GL t-shirts so he's obviously a fan of
the comic.
Howard gave his groomsmen a copy of the 1965 Fantastic Four annual
where Reed and Sue got married.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages